Adapting the Livestock and Fish (L&F) program Impact
Pathway(s) to the Ethiopia Small Ruminant Value chains
Michael Kidoido
Impact pathways for Ethiopian small ruminant value chains
workshop
Addis Ababa, 23rd April 2013

Background to the Consortium performance
management system
CGIAR’s ambition is to achieve the SLOs of:
• -Poverty reduction
• -Food security
• -Nutrition and health
• -Environmental sustainability
• Delivering through CRPS such as the L&F CRP
• CO is working with CRPS to develop a Results Based
system that will be used to assess CRPs’ progress
towards achieving the SLOs
• The management system will be based upon the
Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs)

IDOs
• According to the Independent Science and Partnership
Council (ISPC)
 IDOs represent changes that occur in the medium term that are
intended to affect positively the welfare of the target population or the
environment, and which result in part from the research carried out by
the CRP
 IDOs are attributable to the CRP level and are necessary precursors
and are logically linked to the SLOs
• The definition therefore highlights the need to develop the CRPs Impact
Pathway(s) and Theory of Change to clearly explain how the CRPs
believe that their research with partners will lead to the IDOs and the
SLOs

Objectives of the workshop
• Communicate and validate the program’s
intervention logic in the Ethiopia small
ruminants value chains
• Question and clarify the program’s potential
for achieving impact in the value chains
• Begin building a framework for subsequent
evaluation of the program

Impact pathways
• Are result chains that represent the various steps that lead from product
development to having impact at scale through successive stages of outcomes as
a result of adoption and use of the products by different types of users at
different scales
• Can be represented by a narrative or a flow diagram
• Commonly presented graphically.
Development
Outcomes Impact
Research
Outputs
Research
Outcomes

Theory of change (TOC)
• Explicit identification of the ways by which change is expected to occur from
output to outcome and impact.
• The TOC questions the assumptions about causality underlying the relationships
between outputs, outcomes and impact.
Development
Outcomes Impact
Research
Outputs
Research
Outcomes
Description of causal
mechanism, with
evidence
Description of causal
mechanism, with
evidence
Description of causal
mechanism, with
evidence

Results Strategy Framework and IDOs
Breeding
Programactivitiesinthe
valuechains
Pro-poor technologies and institutional innovations, methods
and tools for identifying and prioritizing appropriate value chain
sites and interventions, strategies and mechanisms for scaling
up and out, partnerships and capacity
Research
outputs
Health
Feedsand
Feeding
ValueChain
Development
Targeting
Monitoring, Evaluation and learning
Figure 1: A Livestock and Fish (L&F) CGIAR program Results Strategy Framework
More milk, meat, and fish by the
poor
More milk, meat, and
fish for the poor
Strategic
goals
1. Improved food security; 2.
Reduced poverty; 3. Improved
nutrition and health; 4. sustainable
management of natural resources
CGIAR
SLOs
1. Increased productivity; 2.
Increased quantity supplied; 3.
High and equitable income; 4.
Reduced nutrient gap; 5. Lower
environmental impacts and higher
benefits per unit produced; 6.
Enabling environment
IntermediateDevelopment
outcomes
International
dissemination of
research outputs,
widespread use of
the research
outputs,
Impact Pathway 1 Impact Pathway 2
Research
outcomes
Improved uptake of technologies by beneficiaries, NARES,
NGOs, and Government extension systems; change in capacity in
the value chains; improved coordination along the value chains
Gender

L&F IDOs
1. Increased livestock and fish productivity in small-scale production systems for the
target commodities (SLO2)
2. Increased quantity and improved quality of the target commodity supplied from
the target small-scale production and marketing systems (SLO2)
3. Increased employment and income for low-income actors in the target value chains,
with an increased share of employment for and income controlled by low-income
women (SLO1)
4. The target commodity responsible for filling a larger share of the nutrient gap for
the poor, particularly for nutritionally vulnerable populations (women of
reproductive age and young children) (SLO3)
5. Lower environment impacts and higher benefits per unit of commodity produced in
the target value chains (SLO4)
6. Policies (including investments) and development actors recognize and support the
development of the small-scale production and marketing systems, and seek to
increase the participation of women within these value chains, will contribute to all
outcomes at the system level (SLO2)

Generic program Impact Pathway(s)

Set of Assumptions for the value chain IP
• Addressing whole value chain will improve relevance, uptake and effectiveness
of innovations.
• Focus and targeting will increase efficiency and the probability of achieving proof
at scale.
• Implementation of demand driven innovations in the right value chains with
partners will accelerate the program’s progress towards achieving outcomes and
impact.
• A significant numbers of pre-commercial smallholders can become market
oriented and intensify production sustainably.
• Pro-poor value chains can compete and generate sufficient incentives to
promote investment in intensification.
• The poor rely on animal-source food produced locally by smallholders and from
less formal marketing channels.
• The poor will consume more ASF if availability and access of products improves
from those systems.
• Increased and equitable consumption of ASF will improve nutrition and health.

Set of risks for the value chain IP
• Focusing on a few value chains might limit geographical spread of research
benefits.
• Social inequalities bar women and other marginalized groups from taking up
innovations, limiting achievement of outcomes at scale.
• High transaction costs of managing a complex network of partnerships.
• Income and gender inequalities are exacerbated due to program
implementation.
Set of assumptions for the IPG IP
• Work on localized solutions can generate regional and global public goods.
• Focus and targeting will increase the probability of achieving proof at scale.
• Implementation of appropriate innovations in the right value chains with
partners will accelerate the program’s progress towards achieving outcomes
and impact.
Set of risks for the IPG IP
• Focusing on a few value chains might limit geographical spread of research
benefits.
• High transaction costs of managing a complex network of partnerships.

M&E/IA next steps
• Finalize ToC/IP at program and value chain/country level
– Will include IP workshops in value chains
• Support ongoing evaluations
• Support reviews and meta-analyses
– Review of recent VC project evaluations (approaches and
findings)
– ASF in diets of the poor
– Compile recent impact assessments relevant to L&F ToC/IPs

Examples of evaluations to validate the ToC
• Ex ante analysis for priority assessment
• User evaluations of potential or prototype innovations
• Evaluations of technologies or interventions (e.g. treatment effects
assessments)
• Outcome assessments document the uptake and use of research
outputs by users
• Ex post impact studies
• Other - reviews, synthesis, meta-analyses

CGIAR is a global partnership that unites organizations engaged in research for a food secure future. The CGIAR Research
Program on Livestock and Fish aims to increase the productivity of small-scale livestock and fish systems in sustainable
ways, making meat, milk and fish more available and affordable across the developing world.
CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish
livestockfish.cgiar.org