Search results

Die Weltbank fördert seit Mitte der 1970er Jahre unter der Bezeichnung "Training and Visit" (T&V) mit Nachdruck ein Programm landwirtschaftlicher Beratung. Beispiele für sehr gegensätzliche Urteile über T&V finden sich in früheren Nummern dieser Zeitschrift. 1991 sind in einer vergleichenden Studie 24 T&V-Projekte überprüft worden. Abweichend vom ursprünglich recht standardisierten Ansatz zeigt sich, daß fertige Rezepte nichts erbracht haben, so daß zahllose Varianten entwickelt worden sind, gekennzeichnet durch auf den Einzelfall abgestimmtes internes Management, organisatorische Änderungen sowie Einpassung in die äußeren Gegebenheiten, um so dauerhafte Existenz und erfolgreiche Arbeit der T&V-Einrichtungen auch nach Auslaufen der Weltbankfinanzierung sicherzustellen. T&V hat hier wichtige aber noch nicht ausreichende Ansätze. Beachtung komplexer Interaktionsmuster zwischen allen Beteiligten, in und außerhalb der Einrichtungen, entscheiden letztlich ob diese auf Dauer überleben. (APAF-Glz)

AbstractThe building or reform of agricultural extension institutions has received considerable attention over the past 15 years, promoted principally by the World Bank and its training and visit (T&V) approach. Many of these institutional development projects have now been completed, allowing cross‐case analysis of the experiences and outcomes. Given the relatively similar objectives and institutional improvement strategies adopted, and the dissimilarities in the eventual performance and institutional vitality of the target organizations, these experiences provide a useful set of cases in which to examine the dynamics of institutions performance and sustainability. This article examines 24 completed extension development projects in the light of an institutional sustainability framework that defines sustainability as the ability of an institution to produce outputs that are sufficiently in demand for enough inputs to be supplied to continue production at a steady or growing rate. Findings from the application of the framework highlight the importance of internal and external stakeholder support, the importance of early success in generating support, the need for both organizational action and learning in varying degrees depending on the situation, and the need to have a coherent strategy that matches the institution's internal capabilities and external environment.

AbstractMuch of the peace agreement durability literature assumes that stronger peace agreements are more likely to survive the trials of the post-conflict environment. This work does an excellent job identifying which provisions indicate that agreements are more likely to endure. However, there is no widely accepted way to directly measure the strength of agreements, and existing measures suffer from a lack of nuance or reliance on subjective weighting. We use a Bayesian item response theory model to develop a principled measure of the latent strength of peace agreements in civil conflicts from 1975 to 2005. We illustrate the measure's utility by exploring how various international factors such as sanctions and mediation contribute to the strength or weakness of agreements.