Since the Green Revolution, the public-sector's agricultural research strategy for increasing food crop productivity has been explicitly based on the premise that technology can cross political and agro-climatic boundaries, primarily through the ‘training and visit’ system of extension (also known as ‘transfer of technology’ and the ‘pipeline’ model). Today, a different strategy is emerging. Efforts to develop the necessary institutional capacity for more client-oriented participatory research, particularly in plant breeding, are now a central part of the public-sector agricultural research strategy. Greater use of participatory and gender-analysis approaches in agricultural research has significant conceptual and methodological implications for impact assessment and institutional learning.

Scores of assessments of the impacts of agricultural research have been carried out over the years. However, few appear to have been used to improve decision making and the effectiveness of research programmes. The Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative emerged within the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), with the goal of strengthening learning from experience and using lessons to improve pro-poor innovation. It is testing approaches for expanding the contributions of impact assessment and evaluation to learning, decision making and improvement.

This paper argues that opportunities for reducing poverty, improving social justice, and influencing policy and institutional changes are being missed as a result of not learning enough from situations where positive changes in development indicators have already taken place. After a review of research on monitoring and evaluation (M&E), positive deviance and studies of ‘success' stories, three case studies of positive change are presented. These are the spread of bamboo tubewell irrigation in Bihar, changes in agricultural research and extension policy in Nepal, and the spread of groups and group-based organizations/federations in Nepal. General lessons include: (1) effective institutional innovation is always new and social arena specific, (2) many opportunistic social entrepreneurs are always present in arenas of positive social change, and (3) there is always purposive selection of what to observe, what to measure and what to publicize. Practical implications include: (1) strengthening social science research on understanding change in agricultural and natural resources systems, (2) selecting people for research and development intervention situations based not only on technical competence but also a track record of interest in social justice development principles, and (3) strengthening a broader concepts reflection and learning within current research and development interventions chan is currently practiced. While learning from the positive is a simple idea, it is always challenging to implement as it inevitably questions the histories, past explanations and perceptions of some scientists and development planners, especially those who promote a mainstream, formulaic approach to the design and promotion of best policies and best practices, and a simplistic, non-political/cultural approach to the transfer and scaling out and up of technology and institutional models.

This paper explores how and to what extent women and men have benefited from social capital build-up (the ability of men and women farmers to develop and use various kinds of social networks and the resources that thereby become available) in technology uptake, and the role of women in this process. Using a series of three case studies on ICRISAT's Groundnut Production Technology, the process of technology uptake leading to empowerment is systematically documented through three stages of the adoption pathway. The process stimulating gender-equitable change and empowerment was examined through a sequential analysis using two in-depth case studies in three villages in Maharashtra, India, and complemented by a broader quantitative study of the uptake process covering villages in surrounding districts. This analysis illustrated that social capital is important for both adoption and impact to occur. Qualitative information complemented by quantitative measures provides a holistic understanding of the long-term effects and benefits. The findings illustrated that build-up of social capital improves access to resources like credit, information and knowledge about new technology options and practices. Furthermore, it expands choices available to each household member – e.g. selecting and adopting seed technology of their choice, and alternative investment options – and influences the distribution of benefits from the technology because of the ways in which social networks and social relationships facilitate technology dissemination. Mobilizing social capital through participation of men and women in groups/networks that crossed caste, class and gender barriers mediated the successful adoption and diffusion of technology.

Farmer participation in agricultural research can improve the efficiency and impact of the research. This functional component of participatory research includes the identification of traits that guide crop breeders' work. Participatory research can also lead to farmer empowerment, although when carried out by research organizations, direct empowerment is often limited to relatively few farmers. Farmer empowerment is, therefore, best carried out by development organizations whose longer-term interaction with farmers is likely to ensure that greater numbers of farmers benefit. Hence, research organizations ought to focus on the functional components of participatory research along with the empowerment of intermediate/partner organizations rather than the direct empowerment of large numbers of farmers.

This paper assesses farmer adoption of rice varieties and new genotypes introduced through participatory varietal selection (PVS) in villages which represent submergence- and drought/submergence-prone villages in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India. It focuses on the involvement of women farmers in participatory research for screening improved varieties for areas which suffer from abiotic stresses. It further assesses the impact on the decision-making authority (or women's empowerment) on rice varietal choice, seed acquisition and disposal, and crop management after participating in PVS trials. It suggests strategies to empower women farmers in making sound and timely decisions on farm-related matters and to enhance their roles in accelerating the adoption of new varieties.

Few references are available on collaborative monitoring and evaluation, that is, how diverse organizations promoting similar innovations can together assess their efforts. We examined the experience of 30 organizations in working together in western Kenya, from 1999 to 2003, assessing their impact in helping farmers to adapt and adopt two soil fertility practices. While the collaborative process improved the flow of information among organizations, it did not reduce monitoring costs, but rather increased them. The process increased participating organizations' awareness of farmer innovations and the number being promoted. The process also contributed to the formation of a consortium among the participating organizations. We viewed the benefits of the collaborative approach as greater than the costs, but recognize that the resources for implementing such exercises may often not be available.