Using Sustainable Livelihoods Framework for assessing the impact of Extension programmes: An empirical study in the context of Joint Forest Management
As a profession, Extension has been prompted to embrace a broadened mandate that goes beyond transferring technologies and triggering agricultural development. International organisations have started to shift from ‘agricultural’ to ‘rural’ focus in their programmes and it is inevitable that extension’s success in future will not be judged in terms of technology transfer or (even) agricultural development alone. As a consequence, the scope of evaluating extension programmes will have to broaden itself for justifying the government expenditure and to enliven its prospect as a profession. Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) Framework provides excellent scope to capture the multifaceted impact of development programmes on clients’ livelihoods in terms of increase in their asset base and decrease in vulnerabilities. The present article describes development of a tool to assess the impact of Joint Forest Management (JFM) intervention in selected villages of the Ayodhya Hills of Purulia district, West Bengal and also shows the results of its field testing. The development of the tool followed a simple indicator-based multi-stakeholder approach taking SL framework as a reference. Conceptualisation of ‘impact pathway’ with continuous incorporation of stakeholder views helped to develop this tool. This was followed by the development of a ‘perception analysis tool’, using recall data, to assess the impact of JFM intervention on the respondents. The field testing of the tool successfully captured the impact of JFM on peoples’ assets and vulnerabilities. It could also discriminate successful Forest Protection Committee from the less successful one. This type of indicator-based multi-stakeholder approach may be applied for the future ‘extension plus’ programmes, which will contribute towards the sustainable livelihoods of its clients rather than disseminating technologies and/or technical information only.
|Date of creation:||01 Dec 2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Chambers, Robert, 1994. "Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): Analysis of experience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
- Glendenning, Claire J. & Babu, Suresh & Asenso-Okyere, Kwadwo, 2010. "Review of agricultural extension in India: Are farmers' information needs being met?," IFPRI discussion papers 1048, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:37793. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joachim Winter)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.