IDH Publication, 2026
Gender-Based Violence (GBV) is not just a social issue, it’s a systemic challenge that undermines agricultural value chains.
In rural and isolated areas, GBV threatens women’s safety, limits their economic participation, and weakens food security. When women cannot work safely, entire communities lose resilience, and businesses lose productivity. Climate resilience strategies that overlook gendered risks leave communities exposed and women vulnerable.
Ending GBV is essential for building equitable, sustainable, and climate-resilient agri-food systems; and it’s not only a human rights imperative, but also central to climate adaptation and economic stability.
The good news? Solutions work. Programs like the Women’s Safety Accelerator Fund (WSAF) demonstrate that addressing GBV can enhance productivity and strengthen workforce morale and brand reputation. Safe, inclusive workplaces aren’t just good ethics, they’re smart business.
Gurmeet Kaur Articles
Luc Barriere-Constantin Article
This article draws on the experience gained by The Constellation over the past 20 years. It is also a proposal for a new M&E and Learning framework to be adopted and adapted in future projects of all community-focused organisations.
Devaka K.C. Article
Sudeshna Sengupta Chapter in the book "Dialogues on Development edited by Prof Arash Faizli and Prof Amitabh Kundu."
Vacancy | GxD hub, LEAD/IFMR | Research Manager
Hiring a Research Manager to join us at the Gender x Digital (GxD) Hub at LEAD at Krea University, Delhi.
As a Research Manager, you will lead and shape rigorous evidence generation at the intersection of gender, AI, and digital systems, informing more inclusive digital policies and platforms in India. This role is ideal for someone who enjoys geeking out over measurement challenges, causal questions, and the nuances of designing evaluations that answer what works, for whom, and why. We welcome applications from researchers with strong mixed-methods expertise, experience designing theory or experiment based evaluations, and a deep commitment to gender equality and digital inclusion.
Must-haves:
• 4+ years of experience in evaluation and applied research
• Ability to manage data quality, lead statistical analysis, and translate findings into clear, compelling reports and briefs
• Strong interest in gender equality, livelihoods, and digital inclusion
• Comfort with ambiguity and a fast-paced environment, as the ecosystem evolves and pivots to new areas of inquiry
📍 Apply here: https://lnkd.in/gcBpjtHy
📆 Applications will be reviewed on a rolling basis until the position is filled.
So sooner you apply the better!
Hi
Am planning to do an impact assessment that will assess the impact of a teaching tool used by teachers Unfortunately a baseline wasn't done and its over three years now. Was wondering if comparing to a control group of teachers who haven't used the tool would work. Are there any other methods that can be utilized to assess impact without bias.
Thanks
Priya Anand
Tags:
Thanks Prya for sharing thereby starting this very interesting discussion. I have learnt something from this. However, more importantly for me, I now understand, from this discussion, what was meant by colleagues, who are professional evaluators, when they argued that not every social scientist or professional who has evaluated development projects/programmes is an evaluator. This was said at the 2014 Africa Region Evaluation Association (AfREA) Conference.
From the responses you have received, it sounds like you would be better off using mixed methods, as well as the 'control' group of teachers that you suggested. The focus group discussions might bring in other factors that might validate findings from the other methods. As someone pointed out in this discussion, some desk research including any reports such as project/programme or field reports, might shed some light with regard to the methodology. Analysing the results against the original objectives and a SWOT(C)analysis might also help.
I hope that it is possible for you to share you experience after the impact assessment is done.
Cecilia
Thanks for a very informative discussion but what about using the most significant change approach establish the effect of the teaching tool
Permalink Reply by Priya Anand on October 9, 2015 at 19:03 Thanks Esteban and Will for recommending Michael Bamberger's book. And to Isha, Sarah and Fanaye. Your suggestions are very valuable.
Hello Priya,
Looks like you have enough to get started here, but I wanted to quickly add my voice as this is a topic of interest to me. Maybe just my lens, bit it seems I can still hear echoes of the great Randomista vs. Big Push Forwards debate (https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/so-what-do-i-take-away-from-the-great-e...). My favorite outcome of that whole era (now, thankfully, subsiding with a few nasty pockets of resistance) was the DFID paper which outlines the full range of potential impact evaluation methods (http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/Output/189575/), the counterfactual-based among them. P. 16-23 have a great birds-eye summary of the options out there.
Regards,
William
Thanks to Deo- Gracias Houndolo from 3ie Delhi office for sending a response through email
Dear Rituu,
Thanks for posting this question.
Technically speaking one can evaluate an intervention using a with - without approach. However findings from such a methodological approach would be biased and change that would be measured cannot be attributed to the intervention evaluated. Simply because without a baseline reference, it is Simply not possible to effectively mesure the magnitude of effect induced by the teachers intervention. Please note that baseline data in the treatment group is not enough to limit biases but you also need baseline data in your comparison group. Hence baseline are necessary to measure effect that are attributable to your intervention. Otherwise, just acknowledge that your results are about outcome evaluation.
More need also to be covered with respect to identification strategy.
In any case, secondary data exploration could be a way to address the lack of baseline data in this case.
Best wishes,
Deo.
I was wondering if it helps to measure dose dependent response. Here change after exposure to time to the tools- 6 months, 12 months, 18 months or 2years etc in addition to the methods suggested
Time-series/longitudinal analysis will require data collected over a period of time among the intervention group. there is no baseline for sure but am not sure if any data has been collected during the 3 years of intervention.
Permalink Reply by Elizabeth Negi on October 12, 2015 at 15:55 Dear Priya,
I think you have all the pros and cons to conduct the impact assessment. I don't think the use of a control group of teachers alone will reflect the changes anticipated through the use of the tool.
I do think Participatory methods especially FGDs as already suggested will be the best option. Teachers/schools usually have past records of these may be a source of qualitative and quantitative data if objectives were set clearly at the start of the project
Elizabeth Negi
© 2026 Created by Rituu B Nanda.
Powered by