This article applies feminist critiques to investigate how agri-food and nutritional development policy and interventions address gender inequality. Based on the analysis presented of global policies and examples of project experiences from Haiti, Benin, Ghana, and Tanzania, we find that the widespread emphasis on gender equality in policy and practice generally ascribes to a gender narrative that includes static, homogenized conceptualizations of food provisioning and marketing. These narratives tend to translate to interventions that instrumentalize women's labor by funding their income generating activities and care responsibilities for other benefits like household food and nutrition security without addressing underlying structures that cause their vulnerability, such as disproportionate work burdens, land access challenges, among many others. We argue that policy and interventions must prioritize locally contextualized social norms and environmental conditions, and consider further the way wider policies and development assistance shape social dynamics to address the structural causes of gender and intersecting inequalities.

For decades, India has led the drive for financial inclusion of poor rural women to facilitate attainment of development objectives like poverty alleviation and women's empowerment. More recently, it has promoted digital financial inclusion to further its fight against poverty and gender inequality and support the attainment of UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In this paper we take stock of how India's digital financial revolution has affected financial transactions and services with a focus on gender inclusivity for the attainment of the SDGs. We propose a framework to understand the gender inclusivity of digital financial inclusion initiatives that connects the macro developments in the sector with the micro-level experiences of improving women's access and use of these services. We draw on India's nationwide developments and present a case study of an initiative that specifically promotes gender inclusive finance. Our findings suggest that India has made great advances in promoting digital financial inclusion but at the same time, the country has struggled to achieve gender parity even within specific finance-focused programmes designed to improve gender inclusivity. We reflect on policy implications of these findings.

We examine the association between the Covid-19 pandemic and and access to basic needs, and how households respond using various coping strategies in the context of Nigeria. We use data from the Covid-19 National Longitudinal Phone Surveys (Covid-19 NLPS-2020) conducted during the Covid-19 lockdown. Our findings reveal that the Covid-19 pandemic is associated with households' exposure to shocks such as illness or injury, disruption of farming, job losses, non-farm business closure, and increase in price of food items and farming inputs. These negative shocks have severe consequences on access to basic needs of households, and the outcomes are heterogeneous across gender of household head and rural-urban residence. Households adopt a number of coping strategies, both formal and informal to mitigate the effects of the shocks on access to basic needs. The findings of this paper lend credence to the growing evidence on need to support households exposed to negative shocks and the role of formal coping mechanisms for households in developing countries.

The global value chain (GVC) literature has recognized the regional linkages of global production sharing while overlooking some regions across the globe. This gap may leave unanswered the question of how South American countries' regional trade linkages have changed amid the acceleration of globalization. This study, thus, investigates the regional linkages of global production sharing of South America by relying on value-added trade measures. Additionally, we develop a pioneering value-added hubness measure to illustrate the degree of relative market dependence between countries. The findings suggest that intra-regional forward linkages in South America have increased over time, but there are signs of a re-orientation towards Asia. China's influence extended beyond Asia, and together with the United States, China became an important hub-nation for South America. Brazil appears as a potential regional hub, mainly through its domestic market and not domestic production. Therefore, the study adds to GVC literature with insights about a missing region, reveals signs of changes in the interconnections between regional blocs, and enriches the research on the hub-and-spoke trade systems.

From long-term qualitative research this paper argues that Chhattisgarh's decentralised mechanisms in implementation of the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) foster increased stake of local communities and local politics, and that these work to enhance accountability and programme quality. A larger number of actors with financial interests in the scheme at the level of the sub-block ICDS 'sector' and down to the village leads to wider distribution of financial gains from delivery of ICDS Services, thereby increasing local competition and political interest from lower tiers of governance. Decentralised mechanisms work to enhance checks and balances via formal and informal routes to governance and accountability. Chhattisgarh's ICDS represents a 'hybrid model' between the short and long routes to accountability. While competing interests from local politics and institutions of governance work to improve ICDS accountability, they also work to appropriate the programme for political gain, or unfairly target ICDS workers. The paper unpacks mechanisms by which local politics relate with decentralised prescriptions in ICDS implementation. It gives the decentralised mechanisms a qualified two cheers.

Research for development (R4D) funding is increasingly expected to demonstrate value for money (VfM). However, the dominance of positivist approaches to evaluating VfM, such as cost-benefit analysis, do not fully account for the complexity of R4D funds and risk undermining efforts to contribute to transformational development. This paper posits an alternative approach to evaluating VfM, using the UK's Global Challenges Research Fund and the Newton Fund as case studies. Based on a constructivist approach to valuing outcomes, this approach applies a collaboratively developed rubric-based peer review to a sample of projects. This is more appropriate for the complexity of R4D interventions, particularly when considering uncertain and emergent outcomes over a long timeframe. This approach could be adapted to other complex interventions, demonstrating that our options are not merely "CBA or the highway" and there are indeed alternative routes to evaluating VfM.

Improving policies-broadly defined-is at the heart of the structural transformation agenda. This paper describes the use of a new evaluation method-outcome trajectory evaluation (OTE), based on both evaluation and policy process theory-to explore the influence of HarvestPlus, a large and complex research for development program focused on improving nutrition, on a specific policy outcome, namely the establishment of biofortification crop breeding programs in national agricultural research institutes in Bangladesh, India, and Rwanda. The findings support claims of significant HarvestPlus contributions while also raising issues that need to be monitored to ensure sustainability. The paper also discusses the pros and cons of the OTE approach in terms of methodological rigor and the accumulation of learning from one evaluation to the next.

Using monthly data, this article examines the influence of Covid-19 on poverty, inequality, well-being, and environmental quality for a sample of 14 African economies from 2018 to 2020. To do so, we employ a GMM approach to look at the influence of the pandemic on achieving the SDGs in Africa. According to our empirical findings, the pandemic significantly impacts poverty and pollution levels. The results show also that the pandemic coefficient considerably influences the inequality proxy. Due to social exclusion and inequities, these economies must embrace an integrated socio-economic vision to overcome the multi-faceted pandemic externalities and build more resilient economies..

One Health is an integrative approach at the interface of humans, animals and the environment, which can be implemented as Research-Practice-Collaboration (RPC) for its interdisciplinarity and intersectoral focus on the co-production of knowledge. To exemplify this, the present commentary shows the example of the Forschungskolleg "One Health and Urban Transformation" funded by the Ministry of Culture and Science of the State Government of Nord Rhine Westphalia in Germany. After analysis, the factors identified for a better implementation of RPC for One Health were the ones that allowed for constant communication and the reduction of power asymmetries between practitioners and academics in the co-production of knowledge. In this light, the training of a new generation of scientists at the boundaries of different disciplines that have mediation skills between academia and practice is an important contribution with great implications for societal change that can aid the further development of RPC.

The COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented global health crisis, rapidly transferred into a global economic and social crisis. The pandemic has threatened the world's commitment to achieve Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030 as governments in developing countries have shifted their priorities from attaining SDGs, to providing urgent financial needs to save lives and prevent recession in hopes for a rapid economic recovery. The rerouting of public funding priorities has undermined the progress and achievement of SDGs. We employed a mixed-method and carried out a comparative study using pre- and post-public financial data of two developing countries in South Asia; Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. A threefold analysis was conducted to investigate the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic in two countries, the impact of the pandemic on external and internal public finance and the effect of the pandemic in shifting the policy priorities from SDGs to economic survival. This study found that both countries are highly vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic and are suffering from the lack of financing from external sources through the private sector as well as an increasing foreign debt. There is mounting pressure on the fiscal balance in both countries.

Achieving impact through research for development programmes (R4D) requires engagement with diverse stakeholders across the research, development and policy divides. Understanding how such programmes support the emergence of outcomes, therefore, requires a focus on the relational aspects of engagement and collaboration. Increasingly, evaluation of large research collaborations is employing social network analysis (SNA), making use of its relational view of causation. In this paper, we use three applications of SNA within similar large R4D programmes, through our work within evaluation of three Interidsiplinary Hubs of the Global Challenges Research Fund, to explore its potential as an evaluation method. Our comparative analysis shows that SNA can uncover the structural dimensions of interactions within R4D programmes and enable learning about how networks evolve through time. We reflect on common challenges across the cases including navigating different forms of bias that result from incomplete network data, multiple interpretations across scales, and the challenges of making causal inference and related ethical dilemmas. We conclude with lessons on the methodological and operational dimensions of using SNA within monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) systems that aim to support both learning and accountability.

The complexity of issues addressed by research for development (R4D) requires collaborations between partners from a range of disciplines and cultural contexts. Power asymmetries within such partnerships may obstruct the fair distribution of resources, responsibilities and benefits across all partners. This paper presents a cross-case analysis of five R4D partnership evaluations, their methods and how they unearthed and addressed power asymmetries. It contributes to the field of R4D partnership evaluations by detailing approaches and methods employed to evaluate these partnerships. Theory-based evaluations deepened understandings of how equitable partnerships contribute to R4D generating impact and centring the relational side of R4D. Participatory approaches that involved all partners in developing and evaluating partnership principles ensured contextually appropriate definitions and a focus on what partners value.

The United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI) Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) aimed to address global challenges to achieve the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals through 12 interdisciplinary research hubs. This research documents key lessons learned around working with Theory of Change (ToC) to guide Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) within these complex research for development hubs. Interviews and document reviews were conducted in ten of the research hubs. The results revealed that only one hub invested in an explicit visual system mapping approach, and that funder timelines, budget constraints and issues with capacity and expertise limited the application of these approaches across all hubs. In contrast, many hubs attempted to deal with visual complexity by means of ether constructing multiple, nested ToCs, or a conscious simplification of complexity through reducing their ToC towards a straightforward and uncomplicated chain model or spherical model. While the former approach had some value, most hubs struggled to find capacity to support the full articulation of nested ToCs. In contrast, the latter approach resulted in ToCs which lacked detail or mechanism articulation, but which nevertheless were often 'fit for purpose' in ensuring effective communication and coherence across diverse stakeholders and sub-projects. We conclude that in instances where the reporting, funding and management cycles of complex research for development programmes cannot be adapted to properly support learning-based approaches to ToC development, imposing simplicity in the ToC might be fit for purpose. This might also be preferable to more complex visual approaches that are only partially realised.

Large publicly funded programmes of research continue to receive increased investment as interventions aiming to produce impact for the world's poorest and most marginalized populations. At this intersection of research and development, research is expected to contribute to complex processes of societal change. Embracing a co-produced view of impact as emerging along uncertain causal pathways often without predefined outcomes calls for innovation in the use of complexity-aware approaches to evaluation. The papers in this special issue present rich experiences of authors working across sectors and geographies, employing methodological innovation and navigating power as they reconcile tensions. They illustrate the challenges with (i) evaluating performance to meet accountability demands while fostering learning for adaptation; (ii) evaluating prospective theories of change while capturing emergent change; (iii) evaluating internal relational dimensions while measuring external development outcomes; (iv) evaluating across scales: from measuring local level end impact to understanding contributions to systems level change. Taken as a whole, the issue illustrates how the research for development evaluation field is maturing through the experiences of a growing and diverse group of researchers and evaluators as they shift from using narrow accountability instruments to appreciating emergent causal pathways within research for development.

While there is increasing academic analysis and policy concern regarding growing inequality and the need for more inclusive development trajectories, it is equally important to advance our understanding of the pathways to attain more inclusive development in practice. This paper serves as the introduction to a special issue examining the empirical outcomes and processes of inclusive development policies in selected countries in Africa. The paper presents a policy implementation and assessment framework as a lens that connects the different case studies. The framework links general inclusive development strategies in employment, social protection and governance, to the participation and representation of the various stakeholders as well as the monetary and non-monetary transaction costs in accessing and/or implementing these programmes on the ground in different national and sub-national contexts. Based on the findings of the 9 case studies, the paper also advances policy directions and operational frameworks to attain more inclusive development in practice.

While evaluation of research-to-policy projects is a fundamental aspect of measuring the impact of new knowledge, limited studies have examined evaluation methods in such projects, as well as how the evaluation can generate learning to facilitate the progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study conducted a systematic literature review and found that the most commonly used methods for SDG contribution evaluation were Analytical Hierarchy Process (40.4%), Fuzzy TOPSIS (13.2%) and ELECTRE and SPADE Methodology (3.5% each). Ranking analysis was undertaken to determine priorities among the six "Big Wins" as defined for the UKRI-GCRF Trade Hub Project, as a case, where the ranking was exercised by the project partners across the globe. Results revealed that "nature and social factors" was better considered in international trade agreements as the priority (36.4%) among others. Moreover, among the four "mechanisms" of the project, "knowledge, networks, and connectivity" was ranked as the top priority (56.9%), followed by "capacity building" (28.5%), "metrics, tools and models" (7.2%), and "improving the knowledge base" (4.6%). Mapping and evaluation revealed that the Big Wins of the Trade Hub contributed to ten out of the 17 SDGs. The most fulfilled goals were SDG 12 (Sustainable Consumption and Production), SDG 15 (Life on Land), and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) in descending order. Furthermore, interaction analysis of the core SDGs revealed both synergy and tradeoff between different outputs. The research articles reviewed for this paper showed no gold standard framework for assessing international development projects against the SDGs. Further research should develop a tool to capture holistic and synergistic contributions of the target outcomes of projects to sustainable development.

The economic and social impact of covid-19 pandemic both on developing and developed countries has been significant. In addition to the impact of the pandemic, the current Ukraine war has also led to severe supply chain disruptions leading to a sharp increase in food and commodity prices globally. Due to a combination of external shocks and the impact of the pandemic global economic growth is expected to slow down from 6.1% in 2021 to 3.2% in 2022 and further to 2.7% in 2023 (IMF in: World economic outlook, International Monetary Fund, 2022). The above factors have led to a sharp increase in government expenditure constraining both developed and developing countries' fiscal capacity. This has further implications for the achievement of SDGs especially for low-income countries. The challenge for developing countries in the current scenario is to mobilise adequate resources both from domestic and international sources, not just for the achievement of SDGs as such, but also to sustain the livelihoods, health, and welfare of people. This special issue aims to examine some of these issues in the context of developing countries.

COVID-19 has acutely arrested the attainment of sustainable development goals (SDGs). Internal mobilization of resources got slimmed as the government's expenditure on health and social safety nets have increased. External sources are also constricted owing to the uncertainties over the cross-border investment and economic recovery process of the countries. A government study in 2017 projected that Bangladesh, on average, would need an additional USD 68.83 billion from internal sources and USD 11.03 billion from external sources since 2021 to accomplish its SDGs by 2030. Using autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL)forecasting techniques, this paper re-estimated future flows of all SDGs funding sources, e.g., fiscal revenues, private sector investment, non-government organizations (NGOs), public-private partnerships, foreign direct investments, and foreign grant still 2030 under the purview of the COVID-19. Revised allocation estimated by this study reveals that private investment and NGOs would need to contribute higher than the 2017 estimation during 2021-2025 while only private investment needs to be higher during 2026-2030.

Recent evidence from citation analysis (Mitra et al., World Dev 135:105076, 2020) suggests that research published in top economic journals is becoming more influential in the development discourse. In this article, we argue that this trend has nontrivial implications for the development discourse on trade in general. Based on an analysis of more than 400 papers published in high-impact economic journals between 1997 and 2017, we highlight three core trade narratives that stand for different biases apparent in the elite economic discourse on trade: "trade championing", "Ignorance in a world full of nails" and "microfounding trade benefits". Further insights derived from citation analysis of five development studies journals and a case-study-oriented approach that focusses on the reception of this particular trade debate in World Development suggests that these biased trade narratives are effectively transmitted into development research.

Co-production is now the gold standard in policymaking, characterised by national and international actors with different types of knowledge working together to contribute to a collaborative decision-making process. The benefits of co-production in policymaking can include improved knowledge generation that merges practice-centred, political and technical knowledge and incorporates local knowledges to provide complementary information and increase ownership over policymaking processes. Nevertheless, it can also present pitfalls such as multiple and diverging interests, incomplete and asymmetric information, and resource asymmetries and elite capture as highlighted by Bender in (Eur J Dev Res, 2022). By reviewing a case in the European periphery, we document and illustrate situations of collaboration and conflict, benefits and pitfalls resulting from policymaking co-production, throughout recent Portuguese history and in present-day participatory budget initiatives. From competing national actors to influences from the Global North and Global South, the final outcome reflects a learning process in collaboration but also underlying power struggles.

This think-piece makes a case for addressing the colonial roots of sustainability. It examines how enduring colonial mechanisms and biases have led to certain forms of value and valuing, problematic views of 'pristine nature' and processes of extractivism. These in turn have led to dispossession and violence, especially for Indigenous and marginalised communities in the majority world. It explores how studies on the environment and sustainability have sought to implicitly or explicitly challenge these colonial biases and their impacts. Researchers working on the environment, gender and sustainability have brought together Development Studies (DS) with science technology studies (STS), (feminist) political ecology, anthropology and feminist epistemology. This has resulted in strong engagements with the politics of knowledge, the colonial roots of environmental problems and the need to lift the perspectives and voices of historically marginalised groups to promote alternative ways of doing and understanding development and nature/society relations. Researchers working in other fields of DS could do more to draw on these diverse perspectives, especially since epistemic and material inequalities and power structures are interlinked and mutually reinforcing. I also focus on the dangers of decolonisation becoming a buzzword without much change in actual practices in ways of working and collaborating.