Pct47
Africa RISING PCT #47
10 March 2022
MS TEAMS
Present
- Bernard Vanlauwe (BV) - Chair
- Siboniso Moyo (SM)
- Zachary Stewart (ZS)
- Fred Kizito (FK)
- Carlo Azzari (CA)
- Peter Thorne (PT)
- Jonathan Odhong' (JO) – Secretary
Apologies
- Jerry Glover (JG)
Agenda
- Get up to speed amongst ourselves on progress to date and next steps for 2022
- Africa RISING in light of rolling out the One CGIAR Initiatives, what do we need to know?
- How can Africa RISING provide synergies towards a smooth transition into the Sustainable Intensification Initiative?
- Possibility for making a program-wide virtual learning event
- Joint harmonization knowledge legacy products at the Program level
BV: Welcome, colleagues. It has been a long time since we last met. Per custom, let us review minutes and action points from our previous meeting. Jonathan, please share your screen.
Review minutes of PCT 45
- Agenda item/ Action (s): Publication of a paper about systems research conceptual framework/(i) PT and BV to develop draft policy piece; (ii) BV to approach Global Food Security Journal editors to check early interest in this kind of article. Share an update with PCT members at the next meeting; (iii) JG will approach the Science Journal editors to check for early interest in this article. Share an update with PCT members at the next meeting.
- Update:
- PT: BV has sent some comments to me, which I am yet to develop further. Sieg and I also had a piece/chunk of it, which we submitted to the Special edition of Frontier, which they reviewed for about eight months and eventually rejected. So, I think we can try and put that on Outlook on Agriculture, but I am concerned that we might meet with the same level of antagonism to some of the ideas that will be presented.
- BV: This has been on the paper for quite some time. One of the objectives was to get some input into the One CGAIR process. Technically, does it still makes sense to go ahead with this? Of course, that objectives still make sense, or should it remain as a priority/something that we should keep working on? There are too many other things happening currently as well.
- IHZ: I thought this paper would be in support of mainstreaming the farming systems approach. So I think it is still vital, although BV, you have indicated that now we have some systems thinking within the new CGIAR portfolio, but we don't know whether these initiatives will be funded or not.
JG: Yes, well, I think it is essential, but with the other things going on, I suggest it could be tabled at a learning event. At the moment, there are probably more pressing issues to make sure that we cover.
- Conclusion: Still important but consider including in the plan for the next learning event.
- Agenda item/ Action (s): Publication of a paper documenting AR experiences with scaling approaches and achievements/ Further updates to be given during the next PCT meeting.
Updates
- IHZ: The paper is 95% complete; I will share a link once we get it from the Chief Scientists.
- Agenda item/ Action (s): A publication outlining and ranking specific farming systems priorities for specific geographies where AR works.
Updates
- JG: From our side at USAID, we are very active on this issue. Zach is one of the main leads on working through the process of prioritizing the production systems and going through the different innovations that we have invested and matching those with the needs on the ground that have been identified through several different ways, and developing a prioritization of innovations approaches, etc. You guys would be the best sources of validating what comes out of this. So, we are focused on prioritization in terms of geographies and innovations.
- IHZ: We are planning to further follow up on this discussion during the ESA Project Review and Planning meeting starting tomorrow.
- Agenda item/ Action (s): Document outlining lessons from 8 years of implementation of Africa RISING, Impact, and RoI/ :*CA and JO to provide a suggested way forward on how to proceed with this activity – the timelines and if there are linkages to be done with the other outputs.
Updates
- JO: This is ongoing. Some discussions have been with the IFPRI M&E team, Chief scientists, and the Project Data Officers. We will give a further update at the next meeting.
- Agenda item/ Action (s): Update nutrition indicators in the SIAF/ ZS & CA to have a follow-up discussion and advise on the proposed process for updating the SIAF indicators during the next PCT meeting.
Updates
- CA: I had followed up the discussion, but then we felt that it was essentially too late and too complicated to include the dimensions of nutrition.
- BV: But it remains an issue that we need to keep on the agenda.
- PT: We have some of those indicators in RHOMIS, and it appears to have a number of those SIAF indicators. So, we might have an opportunity to may dig them out and see how it would work. Expandability of SIAF may be one of those issues that we may need to discuss further with Sieg, Cheryl, Mark, Carlo, and maybe with Vara. I don't see a real mechanical obstacle. For one, it shouldn't be a living, growing kind of framework. But the danger there is that you don't want it to be "anything goes. But I am not sure if that is a barrier.
- BV: It is an excellent point you make, Peter. There is still a lot of questions related to that. So could we make it like RHOMIS, which has a set of corpuses that you have to try and then add as you investigate, fail, try again, etc.? Maybe we should focus on developing a similar process for SIAF and let people experiment with other indicators? We could put this also as part of the learning event plan as a potential topic to discuss in more detail. Listening to some of the OneCGIAR talks is about tradeoffs and impact areas. All the SIAF domains directly relate to the OneCGIAR areas. So, I think it is not a good idea to dismiss it now.
Updates on progress with SI-MFS initiative design process
- IHZ: We have compiled a list of stakeholders that could be part of these country-based stakeholder consultations, but we are yet to hold any. Recently we thought that most of the stakeholders have already been part of other consultations. In general, our initiative is finalizing the description of the work packages and the theory of change. We are targeting to submit the proposal at the end of November 2021.
- BV: Is there space for you between the end of September and the end of November for PCT members to assist you with developing this initiative?
- JG: I think the space between September and November could be critical because the other proposals will have much greater clarity and the initiatives that the SI-MFS relies on like EiA, livestock, plant health, etc. Those need to be clear, and therefore that period will be great to do some alignment. This is still one of the critical things missing between the farming systems-level initiatives and the thematic level initiatives. If some of the key people in each of these initiatives got together and helped to drive that last bit of the farming system, it would be a great help.
- BV: Agreed with JG. Could we book a meeting to have discussions with these other initiatives? That would be time well spent. The meeting will focus on the interactions and overlap between global initiatives dealing with thematic areas and systems initiatives focusing on agroecology, including system identification and sustainable intensification for maize systems.
- JG: I believe there is a group of donors that together recognize that the systems level and the agronomy and livestock are important within the RAFS. I hope there will be a process laid out for a revision to ensure coherence and coordination.
Action: JO, IHZ, and BV to organize the proposed meeting.
Program/Project funds
- JG: We just spoke about this with the systems office/organization. In the area relevant to RAFS, we have $ 16.5 million that we put in each year. About $ 4 million in window two and the rest in Window 3. We would like to see all that amount going into RAFS, preferably in a very coordinated way. Frankly, it would be nice to have some coordinated body (akin to AR PCT) to oversee this process. The question then is - what is the funding modality, but I didn't into that very much with the systems organization today. We wouldn't want to just fund the SI-MFS by itself and just have it hanging alone with its agronomy team and other staff etc.; but instead, we would like to be part of a broader research agenda (above an initiative level). So we don't want to go it alone, but we also don't want to put just a little bit of money into anything. Regarding AR and CSISA, a no-cost extension is no problem; we will send an email out to your centers. The bigger question is whether the initiative structure will be in place and the appropriate funding modalities to put our money into the new modalities, and what that looks like? But I would say that we focus on the critical production systems that AR and CSISA cover. And the US Congress demands that we put a certain amount of money into the CGIAR. I don't know how this will look like. That is probably not a great assurance to you guys trying to ensure that your team members will be supported. So, we have the money and the strong interest to continue somewhere along what you have been doing within the teams. It is just how do we do it? How do we piece together these initiatives? We do not want to go forward without, for example, supporting the EiA initiative or the livestock initiative. Still, we would also like to get these linkages working systematically to harness those interactions.
- BV: There is this contradiction that, on the one hand, we are making an enormous amount of effort to set up the new initiatives, but on the other hand, the budget hasn't changed. If that contradiction lasts for too long, it is likely to affect all these new changes we are working on negatively.
- PT: The NCE is based on the funds meant initially to cover until the end of September 2021. Is that correct?
- JG: I probably shouldn't have said that it is an NCE. It is just because that is the title of the agenda. What I meant is that if you have unspent fund balances, then a NCE is no problem.
- IHZ: IITA got the AR funds at the end of June/July; so, I am using these funds this year starting 01 October. So, I do not consider this coming fiscal year as NCE. It is a costed fiscal year.
- PT: It appears that there is a possibility that the One CGIAR process is not complete by September 2022, and there is still no clarity. If we would therefore need to work longer, how would this then be handled?
- JG: Plan A – The initiative process goes forward, and everything works out, and we put all our money into the RAFS area, and the same type of interdisciplinary work, SI, and systems work takes off in a very coordinated manner. Plan B – it takes longer to set up the modalities of One CGIAR operations, and we still have money to put in; we could continue. In plan B, I would hope that the same teams are still in place and working along with a similar model as we have had in the past.
BV: Since we have two minutes left and we haven't tackled three agenda items, I would suggest we listen to the update from Boni and then move the other two topics to the next meeting.
PCT Member updates – change of roles for Boni
- SM: Starting on 1 July, there were some internal reorganizations in our Biosciences Directorate at ILRI. This unit deals with livestock technologies and innovations, including feeds, genetics, and health. The animal and human health pillars have expanded substantially under the leadership of D. Schillinger as Deputy Director-General. So, Biosciences has now been re-arranged; I will lead the pillar on livestock, genetics, and feeds and forages while Dieter heads the animal and human health, which includes the one health component. This is all during all the One CGIAR process and may still change again in January. Therefore, I am dual hatting; it came in after seven years in Ethiopia, and the bulk of that work (genetics feed and forages) is based in Ethiopia. So, there is the issue of linkages, but I will be relocating to Nairobi to change my role and station. For the PCT, I will be proposing to Ian to allow the new DG Rep to come in, but in the meantime, I will continue.
