Evaluating the integration of strategic priorities within a complex research-for-development funding program.

This paper examines the application of Complexity Theory constructs to a research-for-development program evaluation and presents an overview of the implications and promising approaches for evaluating complex programs. We discuss lessons learned from an evaluation completed for the International Development Research Centre's Food, Environment and Health (FEH) program, which investigated the integration and outcomes of five strategic program priorities: partnerships, southern leadership, gender and equity, scale, and environmental sustainability. We present interpretations from a secondary, thematic content analysis that categorized evaluation findings across four complexity constructs: emergence, unpredictability, contradiction and self-organization. Viewing the evaluation through these constructs surfaced some important features of the FEH program to date, specifically its evolving approach, adaptiveness to emergent issues, non-linear outcomes, and self-organizing agents, which had several implications for the evaluative process. We conclude that the most appropriate evaluation designs for complex funding programs are participatory (to explore all stakeholders' influence), adaptive (to capture the unexpected) and assess external contexts. The application of complexity constructs may be useful for evaluators to gain a deeper understanding of how program contexts change in the face of complexity and why some evaluation methods work more effectively than others.

Building the field of food systems research: commentary on a research funder's role.

BACKGROUND: The Food, Environment, and Health (FEH) program of the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) aims to improve the health of low- and middle-income country populations by generating evidence, innovations, and policies that reduce the health and economic burdens of preventable chronic and infectious diseases. A predominant focus of the FEH program is research related to consumer food environments that promote or enable healthy and sustainable shifts in consumption. An evaluation of the FEH program, led by the University of Toronto, provided an opportunity to analyse the approach and role of a development funder in building the field of food systems research. DISCUSSION: In this commentary, we provide an external evaluator's perspective on the IDRC's contributory role in building the field of food systems research, based on a secondary analysis of findings from a recent FEH program evaluation. We used the field-building framework outlined in Di Ruggiero et al. (Health Res Policy System, 2017) to highlight the strengths and challenges of the FEH's approach to field-building and determined that the program aligns with six of the seven features of the framework. The FEH program has enhanced support and awareness for food systems research, provided organized funding and capacity-building opportunities, multilevel activity to support research and its use, and strong scientific leadership, and set significant standards and exemplars. However, we also found that not all sociopolitical environments have fully recognized or valued food systems research and its use for policy change. CONCLUSION: The FEH program's field-building approach can be situated within the field-building framework, and it has been successful in laying the groundwork for building the field of food systems, particularly consumer food environments research. However, supportive external environments and further investments may be needed to achieve a critical mass of capacity, continue building communities of practice, and influence policy. The FEH program approach may serve as an exemplar and comparator for other research funding agencies looking to develop strategic research programming in the field of food systems research.