Pct45

From africa-rising-wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Africa RISING PCT #45
10 February 2021
Zoom Meetings[edit | edit source]


Present

  1. Bernard Vanlauwe (BV) - Chair
  2. Siboniso Moyo (SM)
  3. Jerry Glover (JG)
  4. Zachary Stewart (ZS)
  5. Erin Menzies Pluer (EMP)
  6. Irmgard Hoeschle-Zeledon (IHZ)
  7. Carlo Azzari (CA)
  8. Peter Thorne (PT)
  9. Jonathan Odhong' (JO) – Secretary


Agenda

  • Brief intros
  • New USAID staff supporting Africa RISING
  • Follow up on action points from PCT 44. See minutes here: http://africa-rising-wiki.net/Pct44
  • One CGIAR research strategy and reform updates
  • AR program learning event 2021
  • Any Other Business

BV: Welcome to the meeting, everyone, and belated happy new year. For the benefit of new members of the PCT, please let us introduce ourselves briefly.

Brief intros

  • JO: Africa RISING Program Communication and Knowledge Sharing Coordinator; IITA staff based in Nigeria.
  • IHZ: Africa RISING East and Southern Africa and West Africa Projects Manager; IITA staff based in Nigeria but currently in Germany.
  • PT: Africa RISING Ethiopia Project Lead; ILRI staff based in the UK.
  • CA: Africa RISING M&E Lead; IFPRI staff based in Rome.
  • SM: Africa RISING PCT Co-Chair; ILRI staff based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
  • EMP: AAAS Science and Technology Policy Fellow; USAID BRFS staff based in Washington DC, USA.
  • ZS: Production Systems Specialist; USAID BRFS staff based in Washington DC, USA.
  • JG: Deputy Director, Center for Agriculture-Led Growth; USAID BRFS staff based in Washington DC, USA.
  • BV: Africa RISING PCT Co-Chair; IITA Staff based in Nairobi, Kenya.

New USAID staff supporting Africa RISING - JG

  • Good afternoon everybody, thanks for convening this morning and afternoon. I wanted to give Zach and Erin just a brief introduction to the PCT and what we do. I have recently missed two of the last four meetings. So, I am delighted to bring on Zach and Erin to provide a back-up.
  • Zach, especially for Africa RISING and Erin, is helping support our cereal systems initiatives in South Asia. But we are taking a team approach to these very related activities, particularly given the transitioning to One CGIAR reforms, which is currently in the "February sprint phase." We are working on a very accelerated timeline. So, I wanted to bring Zach and Erin to make sure that they are introduced to you all.
  • By the way, Zach and Erin, these wonderful group of folks we come together across the four projects of Africa RISING to try and share some consistency across the projects, maintain solid lines of communication, and of course, the team consists of the leads for each of the projects as well as extended leadership depth from IITA and ILRI. We meet roughly quarterly and make critical decisions all the time in a very wise manner.
  • Anyway, just to let the PCT members know, I think having Zach and Erin's support will ensure that we get coverage. As you all know, we are going through another political transition, so some of us are consumed with responding to quite an adjustment in direction, emphasis, and list of priorities now. So, thanks for your patience, and I apologize for missing some of the recent meetings, but I think we'll be more consistent from our side going forward.

Follow up on action points from PCT 44


Publication of a paper about systems research conceptual framework
Progress update [PT]: An outline for the paper has been developed. Drafting is ongoing. Expect to circulate to PCT members and Chief Scientists for input by the end of February 2021. The target is to have a ready draft for submission to a journal in early April 2021.

Conversation:

  • BV: Thanks JG. I know that paper, but I don't see the framing/justification for that paper. Many of the things we are doing are already in the "new way of doing research" that they are promoting.
  • JG: I agree with you BV. What they seem to be describing appeared to me like exactly what AR is doing. One thing to note is that some colleagues here at USAID, when they saw that paper, said, "wow! This could be a 'new way'". So, I think that points out something important – that so far, we haven't reached them effectively enough with what we are doing so that they can see that what this paper says is already being done. We had a discussion recently at USAID with some other partners who felt that we should be following the 'new way'; I pointed out that some of our programs are already doing this. We could use this paper a bit to guide our thinking and end up with a condensed version almost in response to this. You can see getting into nature helps garner a broad audience. These are the papers that get passed around.
  • PT: Without unduly beating ourselves up, we can constructively ask ourselves why we (Africa RISING) have been doing this for so long, but then somebody has all of a sudden been able to garner wider attention? Have we failed to get our messages across?
  • BV: One of the reasons is probably because we don't publish in nature.
  • JG: I do encourage aiming at a policy forum in science or this editorial style in nature.
  • BV: The original idea was to write a paper to make a statement that systems research should not get lost in these One CGIAR reforms underway.
  • JG: I think that would be a great point to make if not only to the one CGIAR reforms but more generally. One of the reasons this type of systems work is not widely communicated is that it is a bit more challenging to communicate than getting an improved variety out or particular agronomic practices. Systems research helps us to look at the whole system and identify what would get us the biggest bang for the buck and what are our entry points? Sometimes it is straightforward – an improved bean variety, sometimes it is much more complicated – household decision-making.

Way forward:Instead of an in-depth journal article, convert this output into a rich policy piece giving the global community some direction on systems research topic. Target to finalize the opinion piece within the next three weeks.

Action points:

  1. PT and BV to develop draft policy piece
  2. 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.
  3. JG to approach the Science Journal editors to check for early interest in this type of article. Share an update with PCT members at the next meeting.



Publication of a paper documenting AR experiences with scaling approaches and achievements.
Progress update [IHZ]:To build on the draft available, the Chief Scientists last week wrote to partners requesting case studies to be added to the paper. The new deadline for finalization is now 26 February, after which they will share with the PCT.
Action:Further updates to be given during the next PCT meeting.


A publication outlining and ranking specific farming systems priorities for specific geographies where AR works.

  • Develop a prioritization somewhat similar to the Waddington et al. paper.

Conversation:

  • JG: What I had in mind was partly but not exclusively related to the one CGIAR reforms. I think there is a great desire and need for direction and prioritization. Let's assume that one of the new One CGIAR initiatives would focus on maize mixed systems of East Africa; what successes can Africa RISING highlight to them? What priorities would AR advise the new initiatives to focus on? For example, AR worked successfully on plant spacing with farmers; what would be the next thing in that system that the new One CGIAR initiative should focus on? Could it be pest management? is it policy? What are the priorities? What are the next things that need to be addressed to move that system forward? And even if possible, give specifics – for example, the current average maize yield is 1.5 t/ha. To transform people's lives, we need to get an average yield of 3 t/ha. This kind of statement is more specific than just saying we need to close the yield gaps. I hope this won't be a significant redirection of focus and energy, but instead just collecting some of the thoughts around what's needed next. There will be a transition, maybe, or even the same people working in the same systems. But it would be a good part of the wrap-up to know what is needed to achieve our goals around poverty, hunger, and malnutrition in those communities. It is a bit of a vague ask, but you know what the priorities should be, not just specifically in agronomy or livestock but within the whole system.
  • IHZ: This is very clear to me now, JG. I am just wondering what would be the best format for us to collect/present these recommendations? Maybe a report?
  • PT: We could link this item forward with the proposal for a virtual learning event. This could be the focus of the event.
  • BV: Before we decide to make this the theme of the learning event, could we reflect a bit more in detail about the process to arrive at a common understanding. The fact that SM wrote to JG for clarification means that there was a bit of misunderstanding, and JG also referred to that in his response. We should first get clarity and ToR for such an event before deciding that this is the right sort of environment to discuss this.

Way forward:

  1. Producing such a document would add value to the one CGIAR reforms and be a useful legacy tool from Africa RISING.
  2. Explore how this item can also be part of the broader thematic focus for the proposed virtual AR program learning event in 2021.


Put together a document outlining lessons from 8 years of implementation of Africa RISING, Impact, and RoI
Progress update [CA]: There is not much to update about this. We are currently having a series of meetings with economists on the team (ESA, Ethiopia & WA) to bring this data to a form where it can be analyzed. There is a process, but its a medium-term goal. Once we have collated the outputs, then we will interact with JO.

Conversation:

  • CA: From the minutes of PCT 44, it seems this output was also supposed to get linked with the publication on systems research. Is that still the case considering that we have just decided to aim for an editorial style policy piece now?
  • BV: Could I suggest CA that you reflect together with JO about the possible linkages between some of these outputs and then brief us via Email or during the next PCT?
  • CA: That we can do. But as far as I understand, this publication is that it will be along the lines of the phase 1 footprints document. So it will highlight anecdotal evidence backed up with data.

Action: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.


Update of nutrition indicators in the SIAF
Progress update [CA]: I made a follow-up with members of the (former) AR nutrition community of practice. I, however, didn't get feedback from all. Some members of the CoP were in favor of adding indicators around the four pillars of food security according to the FAO definition. They currently do not capture food security, but only food potential availability (neglecting access, utilization, and stability). Most address food availability and not nutrition-sensitive indicators (balanced diets). I am not sure how to proceed from this point onwards because the process for revising SIAF indicators is not straightforward. I think it would be good to involve the developers, but some of them have also left the program.

Conversation:

  • JG: I think Zach can be a big help here. Maybe not today, but if he has some thoughts and could even follow up later if needed.
  • ZS: I very much agree with you, CA. I am not in social science or human nutrition, but in my personal experience with the SIAF, I agree that those categories are still weak. We all knew that this would be a living document where we could always add indicators. The process, however, for adding in those indicators still needs to be worked out. We have discussed a process for hearing those suggestions and an advisory group to review the proposed additions. This is just to make sure that it is not one person setting the indicators.
  • BV: Let's keep this on the agenda for the next meeting. The SIAF has gotten some prominence and visibility, and people know about it. So, having a process to introduce changes is very important.
  • IHZ: We got information from one of our partners at CIMMYT this week that he has a new EU-funded program that has adopted SIAF and is using it to evaluate technologies.

Action:ZS & CA to have a follow-up discussion and advise on the proposed process for updating the SIAF indicators during the next PCT meeting.

One CGIAR research strategy and reform updates

  • SM: Last time, we talked about the design working groups fed into the EMT and the management board meetings. We are now on the fast track of coming up with initiatives that will cut across different science groups. What confused most of us in the past two months was that the research strategy was formed around three action areas, and then the organizational structure sort of followed those three action areas. This led people to think the action areas were the programs. However, now there is clarity that initiatives would cut across science groups (the three action areas and bring them together). The work started last week with the Investment Advisory Groups (IAG) meetings for each action area. These are supported by the technical teams (made up of CGIAR senior staff). There has been a long list of initiatives that are now undergoing an iterative revision/prioritization process. We expect to see a new list of the initiatives soon. Every center is looking closely to see that some critical agendas are captured in the initiatives that come up. Some of the high-priority initiatives will be fast-tracked into the full proposal by mid-2021; another will follow on early 2022.
  • BV: Just in addition to the update by SM; There is a process underway to identify the initiatives (large 3-year projects). The aim is to have a shortlist of 30 – 36 initiatives. After this, leads and co-leads will be identified to develop pre-concept templates for those initiatives, going through a review process. Out of those 30 – 36, about ten initiatives will be fast-tracked to be ready for implementation in January 2022. The list of 36 initiatives will be part of an investment plan that the donors (investors) will review and decided whether to commit to or not.
  • JG: I think now is a great opportunity for Africa RISING to articulate what we have learned so far over the past several years. The group is looking for direction on priorities and how to process things. Africa RISING has a lot of it figured out, there are still some issues/struggles/challenges, but it's not a bad starting point.
  • BV: One of the aspects of the reforms is really to assemble people along specific capacities and skills. Like in IITA, we have an agronomy meeting, but the agronomy in that new structure will not be IITA only, but the whole CGIAR agronomists in one capacity. But that is not equal to the initiatives which need to be hosted somewhere, but they also need to cut across. There are two ways initiatives can cut across: (i) within the initiatives – you can say we have a systems component in breeding, and (ii) within the integrated regional projects, which are not yet identified and defined very well. That is where all the components should meet to look at trade-offs in breeding, agronomy, pests and diseases, value addition, etc. So, these are the two ways in which the interactions can happen in practice.
  • IHZ: Are the initiatives already wholly developed, or are they still under development?
  • BV: No. There was a long list of about 150 ideas that were assembled in Nov. 2019. Out of the 150, there would be lots of duplications. If you get rid of the duplications, you would probably end up with probably 100 suggested by the DGs. A list of 30 – 36 initiatives will then be prioritized; 6 of these will be related to integrated regional projects.
  • IHZ: When will be the moment for us to contribute?
  • BV: At the moment, nothing is happening because the Investment Advisory Groups will discuss and suggest what those 36 initiatives should be to the EMT. The EMT will commission those 36 by identifying a lead and a Co-lead who will assemble a team and start writing. I think it is at that point that we can contribute directly. I believe Africa RISING is one of the initiatives on that list as a potential initiative to build on because I have seen SIMLESA, CIALCA, and others there. However, I have no idea about whether it could be prioritized. They may also propose a merger with others. It is also expected that the EMT will open a new window to submit ideas, but it is not yet clear when that will be.
  • SM: A small addition is that the investment advisory group is coming up with an investment plan for 2022 – 24.

AR program learning event 2021

  • JO: I wrote to IHZ, CA & PT 2 weeks ago to propose that we have a virtual learning event this year. I requested suggestions about possible dates, a focus theme, and any other ideas about such an event. The learning events usually help the program to instill a robust cross-learning culture within and across the regional projects. However, since the onset of COVID-19 travel and gathering restrictions, we haven't been able to hold one.

Action:

  1. JO to convene a brainstorming meeting with the Project Managers and Chief Scientists to generate early ideas for a program learning event.
  2. JO to develop a brief ToR/proposed plan for the annual learning event for discussion at the next PCT meeting.

Any Other Business

  • IHZ: Just seeking more clarification from JG about the length of the proposed no-cost extension of Africa RISING.
  • JG: I think it would be easy to say September 2022. This year I imagine we will have the same budget amounts as the one we had last year. I am not sure how we will divide that up again, so I would like to request that IHZ, PT, and CA meet to agree on this and then send me a note within the next week.
  • JG: I have been working with CA and the IFPRI team to analyze their survey work in northern Ghana and Mali. I feel like we can discuss this work's outcomes more widely – possibly in an extended PCT bringing in the Chief Scientists. It would be great to discuss some of the larger relevance of some of the findings across the program in a 2-hour session would be a beneficial exercise.
  • BV: We could have the expanded PCT the week of 22 February. JO, please send a Doodle to all.
Retrieved from "https://africa-rising-wiki.net/index.php?title=Pct45&oldid=487113"