Africa Research in Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation: Research outputs, design and approach in ESA Mateete Bekunda Farming Systems Agronomist East and Southern Africa Project Presentation at the AR-SIMLEZA Meeting, Lilongwe, Malawi 28 May 2013

. Presentation AR Program framework as a guide to action Proposed ESA Project implementation compliance

Sustainably intensify household food, cash crop and livestock production in FtF target areas (West Africa, ESA, Ethiopian highlands) In line with USAID (country) missions Research backstops FtF investments In line with the CRP 1.1 and 1.2 logic Farm-level issues (beyond the plot and field to consumption) Integrate multiple stakeholders The Setting: AR is program supported by USAID as part of the US Government’s FtF global food security initiative.

Program Purpose Provide pathways out of hunger and poverty for small holder families, particularly for women and children, through sustainably intensified farming systems that sufficiently improve food, nutrition, and income security and conserve or enhance the natural resource base.. Income Productivity Food & nutrition security Food safety Value addition; Marketing Nutritious food Efficient resource use

Program research objectives and outcomes ObjectivesOutcomes Identify & evaluate demand-driven options for sustainable intensification that contribute to rural poverty alleviation, improved nutrition and equity and ecosystem stability Evaluate, document & share experiences on approaches for delivering and integrating innovation for sustainable intensification in a way that will promote their uptake beyond the Africa RISING action research sites Integrated innovations increase production & / or improve productivity in a sustainable manner for targeted households at Africa RISING research sites Aggregated impact of these farming practices at household level contributes to an improved understanding of ecosystem stability at the landscape level Dissemination of integrated innovations for SI leads to impacts beyond the Africa RISING action research site

Program development objectives and outcomes ObjectivesOutcomes Create opportunities for smallholders (within Africa RISING action research sites) to move out of poverty and improve their nutritional status while maintaining or improving ecosystem stability Facilitate partner-led dissemination of integrated innovations for sustainable intensification beyond the Africa RISING action research sites Wider adoption of innovations identified and tested within the Africa RISING action research sites enhances livelihoods through increased agricultural output, income diversity, reduced vulnerability to adverse environmental and economic challenges and improved nutrition and welfare Development community initiates programs, based on the knowledge, tools and innovations developed and promoted by Africa RISING, that are directed at developmental goals, consistent with the Africa RISING program purpose

INTEGRATION: Innovations with components that mutually reinforce whole farm performance produce greater and more sustained benefits than the adoption of equally effective single purpose technologies and practices SEQUENCING: Adoption of innovations that lead to SI is affected by the sequence in which the component technologies, practices and knowledge are integrated and applied ADOPTION rates for any innovation (combinations of technologies and management practices and knowledge) are enhanced by targeting demand from, and capacities of potential adopters TRADE-OFF: Effective targeting of innovations reduces the negative impacts of trade-offs between farm productivity and environmental sustainability and helps to identify potential “win-win” options for SI. SCALABILITY: A research approach based on targeting and evaluating SI-related innovations increases the relevance of findings from action research sites and enhances their scalability to similar development domains and households typologies elsewhere. Research design: Hypotheses

Actions to address the hypotheses are summarized in the Schematic representation of the program’s Research Framework, indicating 4 Research Outputs (RO), various tools that could be used to address the outputs, and the components of the M&E framework. Also indicated are the themes that apply across all ROs (red arrows)

Research output 1: Includes activities that are necessary to characterize and stratify communities so as to ensure that project activities are able to effectively target identified problems with promising interventions.

Research output 2: This output is delivered via a broad approach of participatory technology development and/or identification. It requires projects to allow for the identification of existing sound practices within communities that might be more widely propagated, the adaptation of these and other exogenous innovations, and the more effective combination of innovations from multiple sources.

Research output 3: RO3 recognizes that, even where effectively targeted RO2 technology combinations have been identified, the approaches used for scaling them out may not always be effective and seeks to redress this shortcoming.

Research output 4: Integrated M and E Process. The programme will aim to wrap the three process- oriented outputs in a firm M and E framework.

ESA Project implementation approach  Review and Planning meeting in Arusha; October 1-5, 2012  An R4D Platform at the ESA Level  Objects for the meeting were: 1.Guided by the Research Framework, develop an action plan for Year 2012/ Capitalize on Year 2011/2012 jumpstart projects to inform planning for the next year(s) 3.Form research teams & draft research proposals 4.Receive feedback from a wider stakeholder group about the plans formulated

Planning meeting outputs : Prioritized challenges for ESA  Seed (tolerant to drought, pests and diseases; improved varieties and distribution systems)  Soil fertility  Pest, disease and weed management  Agronomic practices (planting periods, spacing, rotations, intercropping)  Conservation of natural resources (Integrated Soil and Water Management)  Post-harvesting (value addition & utilization, agro-processing)  Markets (access, organizational, opportunities and niches)  Institutions (Innovation platforms to strengthen partnerships, farmer organizations, networks - conflict management)  Livestock (management skills, pastures and feeds, health, product processing, breeds)  Information and communication  Capacity building

1. Crop/Tree 3.Livestock 2. Soil/Water 1.Crop 2.Soil 3.Livestock 4.Crop Soil 5.Crop Livestock 6.Soil Livestock 7.Crop Soil Livestock Planning meeting outputs: Integrated Research as AR’s operational niche R4D Platforms Markets Institutions Policies

Planning meeting outputs: Research team formation RO1 activities required urgent attention; its results were to inform action designs for the other outputs. The RO1 Discussion Group develop a workplan with assigned responsibilities, expected to be undertaken by Jan 31, Activities included:  Mega-site stratification  Action site selection  Farm HH typologing  Identification of research entry points  Inventory of innovations  Ex-ante analysis of potential technologies  Priority setting & planning for integrated systems improvement

Planning meeting outputs: Research team formation  Concurrent with actions by RO1 Team, it was agreed that RO2 Teams should be formed to conduct research guided by information/challenges identified during the Planning meeting, addressing four themes:  Cropping systems  Cropping + intensive livestock systems  Cropping + extensive livestock systems  Livestock systems

Post-planning meeting implementation  RO1 Team has not been formally instituted. Instead, an alliance between IFPRI and RO2 Teams has been planning and is preparing to conduct a baseline survey in June. An alliance between WUR and RO2 Teams have just conducted a Farming Systems Survey.  Because baseline data were not available to guide theme typologies recommended in the meeting, RO2 Teams were formed based on agroclimate, and special consideration for rice and vegetables as a system, as well as building on experiences of MSU in Malawi.

RO2 multidiscipline core teams Team A: Rice and Vegetable Systems Action Districts: Kilombero. Africa Rice (Coordination): Jonne Rodenburg AVRDC: Victor Afari-Sefa IITA: Fen Beed / Danny Coyne SUA: Delphina Mamiro / Fulgence Mishili NAFAKA: Martin Mason Team C: Sub-humid Action District: Babati. IITA (Coordination): Mateete Bekunda CIAT: Jean Claude Rubyogo / Job Kihara CIMMYT/SIMLESA: Dan Makumbi SALIEN: Stephen Lyimo ILRI: Ben Lukuyu Team B: Malawi Action Districts: Ntcheu, Dedza. MSU (Coordination): Sieg Snapp CIMMYT: Christian Thiefelder CIAT: Lulseged Desta ICRAF: Sileshi / Nyoka N2A (IITA): Anne Turner Bunda College: Team D: Semi-arid Action Districts: Kongwa, Kiteto. ICRISAT (Coordination): Moses Siambi ICRAF: Anthony Kimaro CIMMYT: Dan Makumbi NAFAKA: Martin Mason Hombolo ARI: Elirehema Swai

Guide for Research Team Proposal development – ESA Project  Develop the research proposal and workplans, drawing from, guided by and building upon documentation and information generated over the past year, particularly the report of the Review and Planning Meeting held in Arusha from 1-5 th October. Submit proposals within 3 weeks.  The proposals should conform to and become relevant annextures to the AR Program Document.  Prioritise problems to be addressed in the year 2012/2013 that starts on October 1 st.  Identify technologies to address the prioritised problems in an integrated approach.  Propose research packages derived from the identified technologies that will be integrative at an Action Site level.  For 2012/2013, field work may well dwell more on ground-truthing optimal integration of the technologies. Concurrent studies should be designed to analyze the farming systems in the action sites, whose results will be used to design more focused research in subsequent years.  Identify and consult partners beyond the core team, and allocate roles and responsibilities  Utilise insights from the jumpstart projects, making use of relevant data, information and partnership experiences.  Identify timely milestones  Select “start” action villages and their counterfactuals in the designated districts.  Generate budget estimations for each partner within the resource envelop advised.

Next presentations to show if compliance was achieved! Thank U. …madam, its not business as usual! !