1 / 9

Co-Production of Climate Smart Services

Co-Production of Climate Smart Services. W.-L. Bartels, E.R. Carr, L. Some, A.S. Moussa, S.H. Rao, A. Tall, P.C.S. Traore, K. Venkatasubramanian. Initial writing team. W.-L. Bartels, wendylin@ufl.edu E.R. Carr, edwardrcarr@gmail.com A.S. Moussa, a.s.moussa@cgiar.org

jerrod
Download Presentation

Co-Production of Climate Smart Services

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. Co-Production ofClimate Smart Services W.-L. Bartels, E.R. Carr, L. Some, A.S. Moussa, S.H. Rao, A. Tall, P.C.S. Traore, K. Venkatasubramanian

  2. Initial writing team • W.-L. Bartels, wendylin@ufl.edu • E.R. Carr, edwardrcarr@gmail.com • A.S. Moussa, a.s.moussa@cgiar.org • S.H. Rao, sheilahrao@farmradio.org • L. Some, someleopold@fasonet.bf • A. Tall, a.tall@cgiar.org • P.C.S. Traore, p.s.traore@cgiar.org • K. Venkatasubramanian, kalpanasa@gmail.com

  3. Goal, Objectives • Opportunity addressed: more participatory processes and trans-disciplinarity in the development and deployment of climate-smart services from communities to regions • Goal: build a design & deployment framework for climate-smart services • Timeline: 2013-2015

  4. How will farmers and rural communities benefit • Project intervention areas: • Direct involvement in service design (organic process) • Beyond project intervention areas: • Community of Practice around multi-stakeholder process design • Scaling through aggregate levels of intervention (districts to regions) – phase II

  5. Where will they benefit • 12n+ Communities (~ homogeneous livelihood) • For each district, a set of intervention and control communities selected following a rigorous, stratified random sampling process taking account of • 12+ Districts (~ homogeneous climate) • For each country, at least 2 districts representing contrasted climatic conditions (e.g. Koutiala and Bougouni in Mali) • 6 Countries (~ homogeneous extension) • For each region, 2 countries representing contrasted experience and capacity related to climate services (e.g. Mali and Ghana in West Africa) • 3 Regions (~ homogeneous policy) • West & Central Africa, East & Southern Africa, Southern Asia

  6. Good practices / overarching concepts • Participatory action-research • Climate services  climate-SMART services (climate as one component of a greater system of services, not a standalone ) • Balanced paradigm to effectively embed environmental goals within development goals (vulnerability AND competencies, constraints AND opportunities, resilience AND intensification) • Rigorous M&E system for impact assessment of process-based interventions

  7. How to get started? Next steps? • Writeshop meeting • Purpose: write full project proposal • Rationale: extend the participatory process design to also include proposal writing • 10-12 people involving core team members + representatives from farmers, NGOs, ag/extension services, met. Services, agro-dealers, private sector, policy • towards end of Q1 2013, using USAID seed funds • Assessment of knowledge, opportunities, and demand • Purpose: take stock, assess potential for engagement, by whom, where and for what (blueprinting) • Rationale: organically start the process from the bottom up • Farmer & Community level (keep in mind social differentiations) • Institutional level (met, academia/research, boundary institutions: communication, extension, intermediaries, policy level) • Open the space for dialogue (CoP) and build platforms for interactions between identified actors • Purpose: migrate from blueprint to “assembly line” – nuts and bolts of the participatory process design including innovation platforms, agricultural & communication technologies etc. • Sustain the platforms for continued, iterative co-production of climate-smart services (interactions between farmers and multi-disciplinary technical services) • Design mechanism to showcase best practices related to process design • Vertical farmer exchange visits here?

  8. Measuring success • Success: climate-smart services have been identified, demonstrated good practices • Set up an experimental design where co-produced services are compared with non co-produced services • Identification of tools for dialogue/bridging the gap between farmers, agr and met research communities appropriate for each scale of intervention (community, subnational, national, regional and global) • Iterative M&E protocol with counterfactuals (controls) – rigorous RCT design ported from the technology to the process level • Indicators measuring the intensity in exchange of tools and methods across the various levels of granularity (communication methods / radios)

  9. Other ideas for consideration • Level of ownership of CCAFS is variable • Need to engage people who want to be engaged • Avoid becoming a ‘gender’ thing • Support different teams in starting a new process design from beginning to end • What’s the buy-in for this process (where are all the national stakeholders?) • Our specificity: we are proposing a framework to design processes of engagement that will ultimately lead to climate-smart services ( building capacity for teams within the CCAFS community to design these processes) • Learn from participatory plant breeding & selection • Assessing the barriers to some of these participatory processes

More Related