1. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE CRP5 Basins M&E - Where we stand Addis Ababa, May 29 Claudia Ringler

2. New Frank Request (May 28/2012) 1/3  3 to 5 outcome metrics/indicators and target levels for years 3 and 5 that relate to the SLOs  Plus a larger set of metrics that cascades this down at least one level for the CRP’s key priority research areas, and possibly regional areas, where relevant  Fund Council and Consortium develop an annual process for allocating CRP funding that takes into account: (a) contributions CRPs make to SLOs; (b) value for money; and (c) quality of monitoring and verification.

3. New Frank Request (May 28/2012) 2/3 ..creating a transparent performance management system with templates/protocols for decisions will help compute/model the value contribution of each project and CRP to the SLO.  Employing modern decision science methods helps model or map the universe of research alternatives can in theory be plotted in sorted order along an efficiency frontier (in a value to cost ratio plot) enabling the strategic time-phased prioritization of research investment choices (only those projects/programs on the frontier should be candidates for funding).

4. New Frank Request (May 28/2012) 3/3 Performance Funding that operates for three years (2013-15) could reward Centers and CRPs that are ready to move faster for: --great performance matrix --achieving great performance  Awards for 2013 could be based on the quality of the first set of CRP outcomes produced by September 2012, together with the quality of the (proposed) reporting and its use in adaptive management

5. Strategic System-Level Outcomes (SLOs)  Reduce rural poverty  Increase food security  Improve nutrition and health  Ensure more sustainable management of natural resources

6. Strategic System-Level Outcomes (SLOs) for CRP5—EXAMPLE (02/2011) Reduce rural povertyIncrease food security Improve nutrition and health Ensure more sustainable management of natural resources Improved and safeguarded access to land and water resources; benefit to 135 million of poor smallholders in SSA and India from improved small scale water management practices; in India, low cost water technologies could lead to an aggregated agricultural income increase of US$ 83 Billion Greater land and water productivity and nutrient use efficiency delivered, likely to lead to a doubling or tripling of crop yields Safe wastewate r re-use Improved land and soil health and water quality to reduce degradation and rehabilitation of degraded land; improved ecosystem services; building resilience by enhancing the ability of people to manage water and land to sustain ecosystem services http://consortium.cgiar.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/CGIAR-SRF-Feb_20_2011.pdf

7. CRP5 (basin?) outcomes [Frank info]  Benefit-sharing mechanisms as a water management tool in the small Andean basins  Integrating environmental water allocations and climate change impacts with water resources development in the Ganges and Inus River Basins  Harmonizing the water-energy-environment nexus in the Mekong Basin  Managing water resources to reduce poverty and improve wetland management in the Nile River Basin  [plus 2 on RRR and 1 on supplementary irrigation]  -> poor balance

8. CRP5 (basin?) outcomes [sent by Colin] · Improved management of soils, landscape vegetation and crop cover, water quality, reduced erosion and better conjunctive groundwater- surface water use leading to greater sustainability of ecosystem services and benefits to downstream water users (SLO4) · Regional evidence of changes in practice leading to sustainable land and water management including soil fertility, biodiversity protection, water flow and quality improvements as measured by a range of standard natural resource indicators. · Strengthened resilience and adaptive capacity in poor, vulnerable and marginalized groups and households, particularly in rainfed cropping and pastoral environments (SLO 1 and 2). · Impacts on numbers of communities, houselholds and individuals as measured by changes in production output, local and regional food security, income and quality of life. Measures of increasing numbers of people reached through scaling up processes adopted by implementing partners

9. CRP5 (basin?) outcomes [sent by Colin] · Reduced gender disparities in access to and control of resources and decision-making through beneficial changes in gender norms and roles (SLO 1, 3). · Evidence of engagement of more women and minority groups in decision making and land and water management processes Impacts on numbers of communities, houselholds and individuals as measured by changes in production output, local and regional food security, income and quality of life. · Improved policy and formal and informal institutional structures and processes to support pro-poor, gender- equitable and sustainable development (SLO 1, 2). · Examples of policy and institutional change at national and regional levels. Adoption of good practice outcomes as policy by outreach partners that enables scaling up of results

10. CRP5 (basin?) outputs [Frank only reports ‘problems’-Performance matrix was sent] 4.1 Improved academic, Institutional and public knowledge and uptake of gender- and environment- sensitive ways to manage water resources variability 4.1.1 Current and future blue and green water resources variability is understood and accounted for in water resources planning in most of the study basins 4.1.2 Policies take cognicance of water storage as a continuum of suface and subsurface natural and man-made options, all having characteristic social and environmental dimensions and impacts that need to be quantified. 4.1.3 International funding agencies support sustainable, ecologically and socially rsponsible water infrastructure development plans to alleviate adverse impacts of water variability and extremes on food production and community resilience

11. CRP5 (basin?) outputs [Frank only reports ‘problems’-Performance matrix was sent] 4.2 Improved land and water management practices that take account of impacts on ecosystem services, environmental flows, downstream water users, and access to resources 4.2.1 Drivers of land and water management changes, constraints to the use of improved land and water management practices, and impacts of such alternate practices are identified and quantified 4.2.2 Approaches for improved asessment of social and environmental risks accosiated with development of new land and water supply sources are suggested and communicated to decision makers in the study basins. 4.2.3 Capacity strengthened of partner institutions to assess the scale impacts of land and water management innovations, and to mainstream ecosystem aproach in baisn management

12. CRP5 (basin?) outputs [Frank only reports ‘problems’-Performance matrix was sent] 4.2 Better infomed overall basin planning and management 4.3.1 The benefits of acquisition and free sharing of water and land -related data and information needed for informed water and land management in basins are illustrated 4.3.2 Benefit sharing mechanisms for managing water in head and downstream users developed and implemented; and the effects of their introduction on access to resources, ecosystem services and livelihoods are evaluated 4.3.3 Effective governance structures and dialogs for trans boundary rivers and upstream-downstream interactions are developed and adopted in regional/national/river basin water management policies

13. CRP5 Basin SRP—Theory of Change 1.Role of basins in managing resource variability / Basins as loci of water infrastructure 2.Basins for sustainably allocating water and land resources – and equitable sharing of benefits 3.Water in a political economy context

14. Where we need to be 1.3-5 quantifiable metrics (increased crop per drop/reduced ecosystem degradation..) and targets (increase by 10% for river basin X) for CRP5 as a whole 2.Approx 3 quantifiable metrics and targets for basin SRP 3.Request proposals under the latter 4.…or reverse engineer!!