Research on the path and method of natural resources' use regulation based on logical framework approach

2022 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 59
Author(s):  
Jiang ZHU ◽  
Guo-jie ZHANG ◽  
Jiang-chun YAO
2014 ◽  
Vol 998-999 ◽  
pp. 1642-1648
Author(s):  
Chun Mei Wang ◽  
Bao Feng Chen

Research achievements of the ASTP Policy-Oriented cannot generate directly economic benefit, social benefit and ecological benefit. It would realize benefit of ASTP only if the outputs can be transformed practical productive forces. In this paper, the mechanism and pathway of achieving benefit of ASTP is analyzed deeply based on the logical framework model. Then the empirical studies shows that the inputs (research investment) have positive correlation with outputs (research achievement), extension and outcomes (changes in productivity). Although the inputs have a certain influence to agricultural economics, it mainly affects indirectly agricultural development by research achievements and extension. Therefore, the benefits of ASTP should not be evaluated according by inputs/outputs methods. We must analyze and assess the anticipated chain of cause/effect relationships of ASTP based on the program “theory-driven” approach. It can promote agricultural research and extension projects to integrated closely, at the same time the benefit of ASTP can be improved greatly.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-122
Author(s):  
Lisa Ringhofer ◽  
Karin Kohlweg

This article critically reflects on two development programme planning methodologies: the dominant Logical Framework Approach (LFA) and the Theory of Change (ToC). It reviews their conceptual origins and outlines their commonalities, differences and challenges in day-to-day development practice. The article claims that while both approaches originate from the same family of programme theory, the LFA has over the years somehow lost its analytic lens to capture social change and become more of a donor-driven performance management tool. The ToC has restored some of these analytical and engagement aspects that the LFA approach was originally designed to elicit, but some of the practical challenges remain. The authors argue for a combined use of both methodologies, if held lightly and approached from a learning and not a compliance perspective.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 1017-1029
Author(s):  
Harmony K. Musiyarira ◽  
Mallikarjun Pillalamarry ◽  
Ditend Tesh ◽  
Namate Nikowa

2001 ◽  
Vol 01 (188) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Thomas K. Morrison ◽  
Sarmad Khawaja ◽  
◽  

2022 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 756
Author(s):  
Rocío Rodríguez-Rivero ◽  
Isabel Ortiz-Marcos

When working with international development projects (IDPs), the use of the logical framework approach (LFA) prevails as the most important tool to plan and manage these projects. This paper presents how the methodology has been enriched, including risk management (LFRMA logical framework with risk management approach), proposing an original contribution, tested with professionals that will improve the effectiveness of IDPs by increasing their success rate and their sustainability. The steps followed to design the methodology (problem statement (literature review, interview with experts, questionnaire for professionals. and statistical analysis), case study analysis (eight case studies in Colombia, interviews with IDPs managers, focus groups, questionnaire for participants, qualitative analysis, and fuzzy analysis) and design of LFRMA (focus group with experts)) and the methodology itself (how to introduce risk management during all the life cycle through the methodology steps) are presented. Conclusions answer the research questions: can the effectiveness and sustainability of IDPs be improved? Can risk management help to improve IDPs effectiveness? Would it be useful to introduce risk management into the LFA? The LFRMA methodology consists of two fields of application, the first at the organization level and the second at the project level.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document