1 / 27

Stakeholder engagement, innovation platforms and outscaling

Stakeholder engagement, innovation platforms and outscaling. Sabine, Lance, K atherine, Jan Dryland Systems East And Southern Africa IRT meeting, ILRI Addis, 21-23 October 2014. I IPs. Learning & change. Curiosity & passion Testing & evaluation Reflection.

george-alford
Download Presentation

Stakeholder engagement, innovation platforms and outscaling

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Stakeholder engagement, innovation platforms and outscaling Sabine, Lance, Katherine, Jan Dryland Systems East And Southern Africa IRT meeting, ILRI Addis, 21-23 October 2014

  2. I IPs Learning & change Curiosity & passion Testing & evaluation Reflection

  3. What is an IP?

  4. How can we use IPs in Dryland Systems? • 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 Cup and ball model Van Rooyen, 2013

  5. Contextualizing development pathways: Stakeholder engagement and innovation platforms +Production + Income + Nutrition +Environment… Socio-economic Intensification VC development Genetic intensification Modern technologies Ecological intensification CL systems integration + IP • Define pathways (gender) • Identify & test “quick wins” • Verify & adjust in context • Promote VC development Adapted from Van Rooyen et al (2013) , MPR (2013), Rufino (2009)

  6. Stepping stones for farmers participating in local development pathways 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 After Dorward et al., (2010)

  7. Resilient and profitable farming systems in Marara, Tete

  8. Farming systems in Central Mozambique Marara district High potential for market oriented livestock production Manica district High potential for crop livestock integration and intensification Marara district Manica district (Source: CIMMYT)

  9. Visions and opportunities Market oriented livestock production Resilient and profitable state Barriers + solutions IP → Lack of land ownership → Weak social capital (internal/external) → Lack of knowledge on crop livestock technologies Vulnerable state

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

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

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

  13. 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

  14. 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.

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

  16. Key principles for stakeholder engagement and IPs • 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

  17. Working questions 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?

  18. 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?

  19. 2. How can IPs support outscaling?

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

  21. 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

  22. 1. INITIATE PLATFORM 2. DECIDE ON FOCUS START 3. IDENTIFY OPTIONS 7. ANALYSE AND LEARN 5. DEVELOP CAPACITY 4. TEST AND REFINE SOLUTIONS 6. IMPLEMENT AND SCALE UP Innovation platforms tend to follow a seven-step cycle

  23. Linking action at different levels through IPs National level: Influence policies, negotiate access to new markets Linking innovation platforms vertically (across levels) and horizontally (with other platforms at the same level) has many benefits Provincial level: operationalize policies District level: action on the ground

  24. Input and support Producers Central/Core Partners Main Stakeholders; Continuous participation {Farmers (ZFU), RDC, Buyers, AREX, DLPD, VET, ZRP, Traditional leaders, Meat inspectors} Research Policy makers Secondary Partners Intermediate Stakeholders Regular participation Peripheral Partners Outsider Stakeholders Occasional participation Development Consumers Market Intermediaries Processors Structure of the Innovation Platform

  25. Development Process Activities & Outputs M&E Sustainability Establish IP and define roles and responsibilities Set Impact Indicators Activities implemented by members Workshop M&E Project Driven Activities implemented by members Stakeholder Driven Workshop M&E Activities implemented by members Workshop M&E Activities implemented by members Workshop Workshop Time

  26. IP and innovation systems • 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; • 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 • 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; • Creating opportunity for self-organization: the functioning of the IP promotes self-organization based on production or market interests.

More Related