Contribution analysis of a Bolivian innovation grant fund: mixing methods to verify relevance, efficiency and effectiveness

Abstract

We used contribution analysis to verify the key assumption in the intervention logic of an innovation fund in Bolivia directed to economic farmer organisations to develop value-added activities. We focussed the research on three sub-components of the intervention logic: relevance of the farmer groups for local economic development, effectiveness of the fund in strengthening these group, and efficiency of the grant allocation mechanism. We used a case-based comparative analysis to assess effectiveness: improved market access for members, strengthened organisational capacities and the capacity to pay organisational costs. We showed that the grants to already well-endowed organisations were particularly unsuccessful. ARTICLE HISTORY

Using Actor-Based Theories of Change to Conduct Robust Evaluation in Complex Settings

“…As noted, ToCs are used in many theory-based evaluation approaches, such as realist evaluation and contribution analysis. Contribution analysis (CA) (Mayne, 2001(Mayne, , 2009(Mayne, , 2011(Mayne, , 2012a) is increasingly being used in evaluations of interventions in order to address the perennial challenge of "dealing with causality, " particularly in complex systems where changes in outcomes are the result of a number of factors in addition to the intervention-that is, situations where there are several factors acting together to bring about change, with each factor being a contributory cause and none being sufficient on its own to bring about the desired change (Mayne, 2012a; see also Buckley, 2016;Buregeya, Brousselle, Nour, & Loignon, 2017;Delahais & Toulemonde, 2017;Downes, Novicki, & Howard, 2018;Kane, Levine, Orians, & Reinelt, 2017;Mayne, 2012b;Noltze, Gaisbauer, Schwedersky, & Krapp, 2014;Terrapon-Pfaff, Gröne, Dienst, & Ortiz, 2018;and Ton, 2017. The aim is to make credible causal claims about the contribution an intervention is making to observed results. CA argues that if one can verify or confirm a theory of change with empirical evidence, 1 then it is reasonable to conclude that the intervention in question has made a difference.…”

Towards ethical good practice in cash transfer trials and their evaluation.

“…CA differs from RCTs in that it does not seek a counterfactual explanation of causality (establishing what would have happened had the intervention not taken place), but rather builds a ‘contribution story’ about how an intervention contributes (or not) to change – in other words, whether and how it works, for whom, and under what circumstances ( Ton, 2017 : 121). CA was developed by John Mayne in response to the limitations with and frequent inappropriateness of experimental design ( Mayne, 2011 ; Mayne, 2012 ; Mayne, 2015 ).…”

Revisiting Contribution Analysis

“…As such, it explores how and why interventions are working and for whom. Contribu tion analysis is increasingly being used in evaluations (Buckley, 2016;Buregeya, Brousselle, Nour, & Loignon, 2017;Delahais & Toulemonde, 2017;Downes, Novicki, & Howard, 2018;Kane, Levine, Orians, & Reinelt, 2017;Noltze, Gais bauer, Schwedersky, & Krapp, 2014;Ton, 2017), and in particular to address causal issues in complex settings (Koleros & Mayne, 2019;Palladium, 2015).…”