MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1593121866

Assessing innovations in international research and development practice

2010· preprint· en· W1593121866 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Laxmi Prasad Pant

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2010
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMaastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology, United Nations UniversityInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsSocial impact assessmentStakeholderImpact assessmentPsychological interventionNatural resourcePovertyKnowledge managementBusinessPolitical scienceEconomic growthPublic relationsPsychologyEconomicsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enhancing impacts of international development interventions has become a central issue of the twenty-first century.Conventional monitoring and evaluation (M&E) tools either focus on efficiency (output-to-input relationships) or strive to demonstrate a logical progression from specific actors and factors of an intervention to development impacts (inputs => activities => outputs => outcomes => impacts).However, in complex adaptive systems there is neither such a linear results chain nor can impacts be unambiguously attributed to an actor or a factor.Therefore, alternative ways of doing M&E focus on outcomes -the changes in behaviour and social relations -rather than on impacts, such as poverty reduction, environmental protection and social inclusion.Innovation systems thinking, particularly in renewable natural resource, agriculture and rural development, informs that the dominant paradigm of impact assessment should be complemented by social innovation assessment, providing research and development actors with critical learning lessons.This paper integrates two distant bodies of literature -the literature on impact assessment of research and development interventions, and the literature on social psychology of assessing learning and innovations.Based on case studies of a series of projects implemented in India and Nepal under DFID's 11-year Renewable Natural Resources Research Strategy (RNRRS) programme between 1995 and 2006, a social innovation assessment tool was developed and implemented.The tool includes questions about critical incidents and modes of stakeholder interactions to be ranked on a four-point scale depending on how often the statements apply to the respondents' work environments.The social innovation assessment provides critical learning lessons for social innovation generation and overall performance improvement in collaborative research and development interventions at the organisational, network and system levels.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.283
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.356
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.884

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2830.356
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0270.021
Science and technology studies0.0040.026
Scholarly communication0.0230.020
Open science0.0030.027
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)Same topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207