Community Driven Development, Collective Action and Elite Capture in Indonesia

Dasgupta, Aniruddha; Beard, Victoria A.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-7660.2007.00410.x

Cited by 313 publications

(247 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

219

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Elite capture is clearly a problem for some FFS programmes and may stem from the fact that FFS training can largely be regarded as a private and not a public good. Dasgupta and Beard (2007) and Alatas et al (2013) have shown that community-based targeting does not necessarily lead to elite capture and that it can be effective in identifying the most deserving community members, a finding supported by this analysis.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 70%

Why targeting matters: examining relationship between selection, participation and outcomes in farmer field school programmes

Phillips¹,

Waddington²,

White³

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agriculture Why targeting mattersExamining the relationship between selection, participation and outcomes in farmer field school programmes February 2015 International Initiative for Impact Evaluation About 3ieThe International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) is an international grant-making NGO promoting evidence-informed development policies and programmes. We are the global leader in funding and producing high-quality evidence of what works, how, why and at what cost. We believe that better and policy-relevant evidence will make development more effective and improve people's lives. 3ie Systematic Reviews3ie-supported and in-house reviews examine available high-quality evidence on the effects of social and economic development interventions in low-and middle-income countries. 3ie-supported systematic reviews follow scientifically recognised review methods, and are peer-reviewed and quality assured according to internationally accepted standards. Each review is independently reviewed by a subject specialist and an expert in systematic review methodology. 3ie is providing leadership in demonstrating rigorous review methodologies, such as using theory-based designs, for combining different types of evidence suited to respond to the complex and dynamic contexts and challenges of development. About this review All content of Why targeting matters: examining the relationship between selection, participation and outcomes in farmer field school programmes, 3ie Systematic Review 11is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not represent the opinions of 3ie, its donors or its Board of Commissioners. Any errors are the sole responsibility of the authors. The affiliations listed for this review were correct at the time the review was received, reviewed and accepted for publication. Questions or comments about this review should be directed to the corresponding author, Daniel Phillips at dphillips@3ieimpact.org.Funding for this systematic review was provided by 3ie's donors, which include UKaid, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Hewlett Foundation and 12 other 3ie members that provide institutional support. A complete listing is provided on the 3ie website. ii AbstractFarmer field schools (FFS) are an adult education and agricultural extension approach designed to empower farmers, increase productivity and improve livelihoods. Targeting an FFS programme affects participation and participant characteristics are likely to influence programme outcomes. We systematically reviewed the literature and then carried out content analysis, meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis to explore how FFS programmes are targeted and how this affects participation and performance. We find that some FFS programmes include equity criteria, targeting the poorest and most disadvantaged farmers in a society on the grounds that they are most in need of the benefits FFS participation provides. However, many FFS programmes include effectiveness targeting criteria designed to promote the inclusion of farmers with more resources, ...

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 70%

Why targeting matters: examining relationship between selection, participation and outcomes in farmer field school programmes

Phillips¹,

Waddington²,

White³

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Anthropologists warned about elite capture in community-driven projects that prevent them from benefiting the truly poor (e.g. Dasgupta and Beard 2007). One can infer from this that RI, if it does not start paying attention to unequal power relations and situations in which irreconcilable diverging interests come up, risks becoming similarly hollow.…”

Section: Family Resemblances: Insights From Related Research Fieldsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limits to responsible innovation

Hoop

Pols

Romijn

2016

Journal of Responsible Innovation

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responsible Innovation (RI) is a young field of research that has nevertheless had remarkable successes in dissemination within academic and political circles. However, there is relatively little awareness of its limits, blind spots and situations in which it cannot be used for actual innovation trajectories. Without such awareness, there is a risk that RI may get hollowed out and turned into a tool for 'greenwashing'. To examine RI's limits, we present a case study on biofuel innovation in Hassan, South India. This case study demonstrates that there are important barriers that may make it difficult to conduct innovation according to RI values. In particular, we highlight the following factors that emerge from our case study and need more attention in order to be included and adequately theorised in the RI literature: material barriers to innovation, engagement with abandoning or reducing existing practices as a consequence of innovation, power differences and dependencies, (un)clear demarcation of responsibilities, strategic behaviour and, lastly, different, diverging and even contradictory interests. We demonstrate that such factors may obstruct the possibility to innovate in a responsible way, leading us to our core observation that RI should be about innovating responsibly -or not innovating at all. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…Source: Pretty (1995) As empowerment places people as main actors, the success of empowerment is highly dependent on the response, involvement, and responsibility of the community towards community empowerment programs, or in other words at the level of community participation. Community empowerment requires the following conditions in order to create a participatory role throughout the whole local community (Dasgupta, 2007): (a) decentralization, (b) democracy, and (c) collective action. The level of success of any community-driven development program using a participatory approach will be high in communities that have a high level of participation, have equality among its members, and have high competence for dialogue (Sufianti, 2014).…”

Section: Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Community Driven Development In Traditional Communities In Papua

Sitorus

2017

jrcp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community Driven Development, Collective Action and Elite Capture in Indonesia

Cited by 313 publications

References 68 publications

Why targeting matters: examining relationship between selection, participation and outcomes in farmer field school programmes

Why targeting matters: examining relationship between selection, participation and outcomes in farmer field school programmes

Limits to responsible innovation

Community Driven Development In Traditional Communities In Papua

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About