The Evidence for Multistakeholder Platforms research program looks at evidence and perceptions on how effectively multi-stakeholder platforms contribute to sustainable solutions to agrifood issues.
The complex challenges the food and agriculture sector is faced with asks for effective approaches. Much is invested in multi-stakeholder platforms, as no single actor is able to deal with the many critical problems.
Our aims are:
To identify evidence needed to assess effectiveness of multi-stakeholder platforms
To identify existing evidence base and identify new approaches to fill gaps
To help platforms to credibly assess their contribution, leading to improved effectiveness
To support decision-makers in making strategic and prudent investments in multi-stakeholder platforms
Structured Scan 01: An overview of 38 MSPs
This document summarises 38 selected MSPs through under a structured scan3 process. These structured scans provide core data about the platforms, which allows systematic comparison. This makes it possible to sketch out the theories of change that underpin the platforms or groups of platforms. It also allows readers to place a specific platform within a ‘universe’ of platforms all aiming to contribute to more sustainable and inclusive agrifood sectors.
Structured Scan 02: General Observations
This publication presents our initial reflections on the nature of the platforms identified and their approach to evidence and effectiveness. With all caveats about limitations in available data and thus reliability of our limitations, we share these reflections in order to contribute to ongoing discussion and analysis.
We also used the structured scans for an initial exploration of connections between a large number of these platforms, specifically looking at membership and leadership.
Structured Scan 03: The Methodology
This document describes the structured process followed for each individual scan. This information was originally written as a manual how to follow the template designed. A spreadsheet template allowed consistent use by multiple researchers, leading to comparable information for further analysis. This style has been maintained so it can be used by anyone wanting to map further platforms.
For the reader who simply wants to understand the methodology followed, it is sufficient to focus on the definitions provided for each item.