Stakeholder engagement, innovation platforms

and outscaling

Sabine, Lance, Katherine, JanDryland Systems East And Southern Africa IRT meeting,

ILRI Addis, 21-23 October 2014

I IPs

What is an IP?

Smallholder farms as complex systems (Ostrom, 2009)•Dynamic, adaptive, non-linear•Social, economic, technical, ecological… dimensions •External factors can cause change, and change can happen from within

Resilience as ability of a ‘socio-ecological systems’ to adapt (Folke et al 2004 )• Reduce vulnerability to shocks and recover from shocks• React to change and make use of opportunities • Proactively create options and opportunities

Profitability for immediate livelihood benefits (Orr and Mausch, 2014) • = surplus over costs• Cash income, with markets as drivers for economic and social change

How can we use IPs in Dryland Systems?

Cup and ball model Van Rooyen, 2013

Geneticintensification

Modern technologies

Geneticintensification

Modern technologies

Ecological intensification

CL systems integration

Ecological intensification

CL systems integration

Socio-economic Intensification

VC development

+Production+ Income+ Nutrition+Environment…

Adapted from Van Rooyen et al (2013) , MPR (2013), Rufino (2009)

+

IPDefine pathways (gender)

Identify & test “quick wins”

Verify & adjust in context

Promote VC development

Contextualizing development pathways: Stakeholder engagement and innovation platforms

Stepping stones for farmers participating in local development pathways

After Dorward et al., (2010)

Farmers have different opportunities to adopt technologies and intensify production systems.

Better understanding farmers resource endowments and livelihood strategies leads us to multiple pathways within a given context

Resilient and profitable farming systems in Marara, Tete

(Source: CIMMYT)

Marara districtHigh potential for market oriented livestock production

Manica districtHigh potential for crop livestock integration and intensification

Farming systems in Central Mozambique

Marara district

Manica district

Visions and opportunities

Market oriented livestock production

Vulnerable state

Resilient and profitable state

→ Weak social capital (internal/external)

→ Lack of land ownership

→ Lack of knowledge on crop livestock technologies

IP

Barriers + solutions

Household types(n=189)

Resource poor

Share of population (%) 12

Female HHH (%)Age of HHH (yrs)Education (yrs)Information indexOff-farm income (%)

88540.51035

Herd size (TLU)Cultivated land(ha)Herd offtake (ct, go,%)

1.91.41

CL integrationDiversified productionCash income (U$S/yr)

++

94

How feasible is it for farmers in Marara to step up?

Household types(n=189)

Resource poor Stepping up

Share of population (%) 12 41

Female HHH (%)Age of HHH (yrs)Education (yrs)Information indexOff-farm income (%)

88540.51035

8355.41466

Herd size (TLU)Cultivated land(ha)Herd offtake (ct, go,%)

1.91.41

1.22.3

10 /12

CL integrationDiversified productionCash income (U$S/yr)

++

94

++

338

How feasible is it for farmers in Marara to step up?

Household types(n=189)

Resource poor Stepping up Intensifying CL

Share of population (%) 12 41 47

Female HHH (%)Age of HHH (yrs)Education (yrs)Information indexOff-farm income (%)

88540.51035

8355.41466

12563.11744

Herd size (TLU)Cultivated land(ha)Herd offtake (ct, go,%)

1.91.41

1.22.3

10 /12

8.23.3

9 /16

CL integrationDiversified productionCash income (U$S/yr)

++

94

++

338

++++

475

How feasible is it for farmers in Marara to step up?

Household types(n=189)

Resource poor Stepping up Intensifying CL

Share of population (%) 12 41 47

Female HHH (%)Age of HHH (yrs)Education (yrs)Information indexOff-farm income (%)

88540.51035

8355.41466

12563.11744

Herd size (TLU)Cultivated land(ha)Herd offtake (ct, go,%)

1.91.41

1.22.3

10 /12

8.23.3

9 /16

CL integrationDiversified productionCash income (U$S/yr)

++

94

++

338

++++

475

How feasible is it for farmers in Marara to step up?

Safety nets

Food crops management

Goat flock building

Livestock as a business

Alternative land use options

Livestock market arrangements

Test and promote technologies

Represent farmers interests

Stepping back

• Using local opportunities to spark buy-in and development within its context (goats, beans, g’nuts VCs, PPPs)

• Working at on- and off-farm scales, e.g. through ML IPs, helps us to create conditions under which on-farm solutions can work – incl. infrastructure, (re-) organization, behavior change

• Engaging in the process we must re-define interventions, tailored to farmers particular circumstances and capacities.

“We farmers are now engaged in a common vision. We have a voice to express our needs, to partners who bring knowledge to us”.

• Understanding livelihoods

•Place based, contextualized approaches• Adaptive and participatory• Towards enabling environments• Multi-level

• engagement• analysis• learning

•Scaling out • Different options across range of contexts• Approaches to generate & promote innovations

Key principles for stakeholder engagement and IPs

1. How can science make IPs more effective?

2. How can IPs support outscaling?

3. What is to be done on the ground to engage in a functional IP?

Working questions

1. How can science make IPs more effective?

Self organization – nurture change management?

Iterative process of problem identification and solving, monitoring and evaluating livelihood benefits

Multi-level learning – methods, prototypes for nudging MLL?

2. How can IPs support outscaling?

3. What is to be done on the ground to engage in a functional IP?

IP Development Process• Focus area, and entry points • Stakeholder Analysis – Who should be there?• Roles and responsibilities – Why should they participate?• Development Objectives – What do we want to achieve?• Data Collection;

• PRA, HH surveys, • VCA Mapping and Analysis

• ID Production Challenges - What needs to change at farm level?• (All stages of production, harvesting post harvesting)

• ID Market Challenges - What needs to change at market/processing level?• ID Opportunities: Implement and test different options – MAKE the

changes!• Feedback to IP• M&E

1. INITIATE PLATFORM

7. ANALYSE AND LEARN

2. DECIDE ON FOCUS

3. IDENTIFY OPTIONS

5. DEVELOP CAPACITY4. TEST AND

REFINE SOLUTIONS

6. IMPLEMENT AND SCALE UP

START

Innovation platforms tend to follow a seven-step cycle

Linking innovation platforms vertically (across levels) and horizontally (with other platforms at the same level) has many benefits

District level: action on the ground

Provincial level: operationalize policies

National level:Influence policies,

negotiate access to new markets

Linking action at different levels through IPs

Central/Core PartnersMain Stakeholders; Continuous

participation{Farmers (ZFU), RDC, Buyers, AREX, DLPD, VET,

ZRP, Traditional leaders, Meat inspectors}

Input and support

ProcessorsMarket Intermediaries

Producers

Pol

icy

mak

ers

Con

sum

ers

Research

Developm

ent

Secondary PartnersIntermediate Stakeholders

Regular participation

Peripheral PartnersOutsider StakeholdersOccasional participation

Structure of the Innovation Platform

DevelopmentProcess

Activities & Outputs

Time

Establish IP and define roles and responsibilities

Workshop

Workshop

Workshop

Workshop

Workshop

Activities implemented by members

Activities implemented by members

Activities implemented by members

Project

Driven

Stakehold

er D

riven

Activities implemented by members

Sustainability M&E

M&E

M&E

M&E

Set Impact Indicators

IP and innovation systems(i) Learning to live with change and uncertainty: the IP evaluates

strategies to cope with changing environments and capitalize on emerging opportunities; seeking out positive change;

(ii) Nurturing diversity: by including a diversity of players and partnerships, the IP introduces diversity to increase livelihood options;

Agro-biological (crops & livestock and combinations), Economic opportunities, Institutional, support systems, knowledge

(iii) Combining different types of knowledge for learning: cross-scale dialogue between partners brings different types of knowledge and viewpoints and stimulates learning through the iterative evaluation of interventions;

(iv) Creating opportunity for self-organization: the functioning of the IP promotes self-organization based on production or market interests.