Schlüsselwörter
(Deutsch)
|
India, rural development, fund, agriculture, extension services, innovation fund
|
Schlüsselwörter
(Englisch)
|
India, rural development, fund, agriculture, extension services, innovation fund
|
Schlüsselwörter
(Französisch)
|
India, rural development, fund, agriculture, extension services, innovation fund
|
Schlüsselwörter
(Italienisch)
|
India, rural development, fund, agriculture, extension services, innovation fund
|
Kurzbeschreibung
(Deutsch)
|
This is the report of the September 2013 external evaluation of the Rural Innovation Fund (RIF), which is implemented by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) with financing from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).Most of the projects supported have been successful in terms of achieving the outcomes and impacts that were set out in the memorandum of sanction by which each project was approved. However, even though they may be technically sound, not all projects have a sufficient poverty focus. Some have mainly benefited people of medium income, although generally in rural areas.There has been huge variation in the number of people benefited by each project and consequently in the value for money that the projects have represented. Remarkably, some projects have reached thousands of people. Others have total beneficiary numbers in single figures. A significant number of projects do achieve some kind of local viability, but that is seldom followed up by a vision of how to make it fully sustainable.A few projects (maybe 5-10%) have great potential for scalability and replication across large areas. In general, innovations which bring existing technologies to new (poor) people and new (rural) markets have the most potential. Projects which have concentrated on technological change and/or an invention or near-invention have proved more difficult to scale up. In general, innovations have proved more effective and efficient than inventions.
Zugehörige Dokumente
|
Kurzbeschreibung
(Englisch)
|
This is the report of the September 2013 external evaluation of the Rural Innovation Fund (RIF), which is implemented by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) with financing from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).Most of the projects supported have been successful in terms of achieving the outcomes and impacts that were set out in the memorandum of sanction by which each project was approved. However, even though they may be technically sound, not all projects have a sufficient poverty focus. Some have mainly benefited people of medium income, although generally in rural areas.There has been huge variation in the number of people benefited by each project and consequently in the value for money that the projects have represented. Remarkably, some projects have reached thousands of people. Others have total beneficiary numbers in single figures. A significant number of projects do achieve some kind of local viability, but that is seldom followed up by a vision of how to make it fully sustainable.A few projects (maybe 5-10%) have great potential for scalability and replication across large areas. In general, innovations which bring existing technologies to new (poor) people and new (rural) markets have the most potential. Projects which have concentrated on technological change and/or an invention or near-invention have proved more difficult to scale up. In general, innovations have proved more effective and efficient than inventions.
Zugehörige Dokumente
|
Kurzbeschreibung
(Französisch)
|
This is the report of the September 2013 external evaluation of the Rural Innovation Fund (RIF), which is implemented by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) with financing from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).Most of the projects supported have been successful in terms of achieving the outcomes and impacts that were set out in the memorandum of sanction by which each project was approved. However, even though they may be technically sound, not all projects have a sufficient poverty focus. Some have mainly benefited people of medium income, although generally in rural areas.There has been huge variation in the number of people benefited by each project and consequently in the value for money that the projects have represented. Remarkably, some projects have reached thousands of people. Others have total beneficiary numbers in single figures. A significant number of projects do achieve some kind of local viability, but that is seldom followed up by a vision of how to make it fully sustainable.A few projects (maybe 5-10%) have great potential for scalability and replication across large areas. In general, innovations which bring existing technologies to new (poor) people and new (rural) markets have the most potential. Projects which have concentrated on technological change and/or an invention or near-invention have proved more difficult to scale up. In general, innovations have proved more effective and efficient than inventions.
Zugehörige Dokumente
|
Kurzbeschreibung
(Italienisch)
|
This is the report of the September 2013 external evaluation of the Rural Innovation Fund (RIF), which is implemented by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) with financing from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).Most of the projects supported have been successful in terms of achieving the outcomes and impacts that were set out in the memorandum of sanction by which each project was approved. However, even though they may be technically sound, not all projects have a sufficient poverty focus. Some have mainly benefited people of medium income, although generally in rural areas.There has been huge variation in the number of people benefited by each project and consequently in the value for money that the projects have represented. Remarkably, some projects have reached thousands of people. Others have total beneficiary numbers in single figures. A significant number of projects do achieve some kind of local viability, but that is seldom followed up by a vision of how to make it fully sustainable.A few projects (maybe 5-10%) have great potential for scalability and replication across large areas. In general, innovations which bring existing technologies to new (poor) people and new (rural) markets have the most potential. Projects which have concentrated on technological change and/or an invention or near-invention have proved more difficult to scale up. In general, innovations have proved more effective and efficient than inventions.
Zugehörige Dokumente
|
Auftragnehmer
(Englisch)
|
Mark Havers; P.V. Ramachandran; V. Mohandoss
|
Belastetes Budget
(Englisch)
|
SDC / DEZA / DDC / DSC / COSUDE
|
Gesetzliche Grundlage
(Englisch)
|
Artikel 170 der Bundesverfassung zur WirksamkeitsüberprüfungArticle 170 de la Constitution fédérale relatif à l’évaluation de l’efficacitéArticolo 170 della Costituzione federale sulla verifica dell‘efficaciaArticle 170 of the Swiss Federal Constitution on the evaluation of effectiveness
|
Impressum
(Englisch)
|
Copyright, Bundesbehörden der Schweizerischen Eidgenossenschaft | Droits d'auteur: autorités de la Confédération suisse | Diritti d'autore: autorità della Confederazione Svizzera | Dretgs d'autur: autoritads da la Confederaziun svizra | Copyright, Swiss federal authorities
|
Auskunft
(Englisch)
|
South Asia Division
|
