This article argues that if the multiple purposes of M&E were recognised and pursued it would help align the incentives of funders, implementers, M&E service providers, and intended beneficiaries to increase the impacts of agriculture on poverty. In reality, these multiple purposes are rarely pursued, leading to the weak provision of meaningful M&E. We make the case that M&E in agriculture is not immune to this, and it may even be more susceptible due to agriculture's unique properties. We argue that one possible way forward is people-centred M&E, which looks for ways to balance multiple accountabilities. People-centred M&E embraces farmer feedback, focuses on incentivising learning within organisations and finds ways to share M&E information more openly.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haddad et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: