If a picture is worth 1,000 words, then a map must surely be worth far more. Especially if it is a map enriched with data – one that shows what and where activities are planned, are happening, and have been achieved.

This practical manual provides guidance on how to use geographic information systems (GIS) in the monitoring and evaluation of rural development projects. With over 20 maps showing IFAD-funded projects, it describes how to map a project’s activities and how to use the data the map shows. It provides sample geospatial data standards and quality checklists for project designers and managers.

To evaluate pluralistic Extension and Advisory Services (EAS) systems performance and outcomes, and share the experiences made with applying a participatory semi-quantitative approach allowing for cross-country comparability.

Results revealed an overall weak performance on most assessed criteria. Experts pointed out a lack of adequate policies addressing agricultural extension, insufficient funding, and poor infrastructure. On the other hand, the increased focus on sustainability, increased inclusiveness levels, and steady uptake of digitalization technologies are areas where progress was recently made. On the outcomes side, users perceived EAS contributed mainly to acquiring technical skills, while less to entrepreneurial and social skills.

The farmer field school (FFS) approach, based on group experimentation of innovative practices and/or farming systems, is in line with participatory farm advisory efforts. This approach has an ambitious goal: strengthening farmers’ skills so that they can adapt their practices, or even invent new ones, and move towards more agroecological farming systems. Assessing such an advisory intervention poses significant challenges. The purpose of this document is to propose fresh ways to update FFS assessment methods, notably the study of changes in farming practices and the detailed analysis of FFS outcomes. Project designers, managers, and evaluators are the target audience for this document, which may also interest teachers, researchers, students, and policymakers. The elements of the FFS assessment methodology presented here stem from the collaboration between three institutions, CIRAD, FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), and the NGO AVSF (Agronomists and Veterinarians Without Borders), and fieldwork carried out in cotton-growing areas of Burkina Faso and Togo between 2018 and 2019.

This document is divided into four parts. We first define FSS and the principles of the approach, then we detail the methods commonly used to assess FSS and the challenges involved. We then present a comprehensive assessment method using a case study in northern Togo. The final part of the report provides a basis for placing the proposed method within the process of designing an assessment for a project involving FSS.

This synthesis draws on 17 recent IFAD Impact Assessments conducted in various countries and production systems to analyse project activities and theories of change.

Overall, this synthesis aims to inform IFAD’s stakeholders about the typology of projects evaluated and lessons learned from them to improve the design of similar future projects and to draw insights into successful drivers of rural transformation.

In commissioning this impact evaluation, ACIAR and the Philippine Council for Agriculture, Aquatic and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCAARRD) designed a process that would enable us to jointly review identify, develop and apply impact assessment approaches that explore multiple impacts of complex agricultural research for development investments, including economic, social, environmental, policy and capacity impacts.

The evaluation, published as An integrated approach to ex-post impact assessment, ACIAR Impact Assessment Report No. 102, has 2 parts. Part 1 provides a framework to guide an integrated approach to ex-post impact assessment. It includes insights and lessons from the process of collaboratively developing this framework and in trialling such an approach.

Part 2 provides an example of how the framework was applied to Landcare projects in the Philippines. This section details the experiences of the University of the Philippines, Los Baños and Visayas State University in implementing the integrated approach to impact assessment outlined in Part 1. Part 2 also includes reflections and implications from the Philippines team, based on their experiences implementing the approach.