Pct47

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

Africa RISING PCT #47
10 March 2022
MS TEAMS[edit | edit source]


Present

  1. Bernard Vanlauwe (BV) - Chair
  2. Siboniso Moyo (SM)
  3. Zachary Stewart (ZS)
  4. Fred Kizito (FK)
  5. Carlo Azzari (CA)
  6. Peter Thorne (PT)
  7. Jonathan Odhong' (JO) – Secretary


Apologies

  1. 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. I hope we can start to make the PCT meetings more regular once again. SM has requested me (via email) to continue chairing the PCT until September 2022. Maybe she wants to comment?

SM: I probably mentioned during our previous meeting that I have taken up new responsibility as the Deputy Director-General for Livestock Genetics and Feeds and Forage Program at ILRI. So that is why I relocated from Addis Ababa to Nairobi. Internally (within ILRI), I will continue in the PCT for continuity because of a long history with Africa RISING. And I am happy to do so.

Get up to speed amongst ourselves on progress to date and next steps for 2022

  • FK: With the ESA and WA projects, things are going according to plan. The workplans for both projects have been compiled. Likewise, the sub-agreements with all partners are also in place. We are planning a series of close-out field days in collaboration with the communications team and also in the context of an end-of-program report for a broader audience with whom we would like to share our work.
  • PT: Implementation of activities in the Ethiopian high is also progressing well. Our workplans were defined last November, focusing on legacy products, exit strategies, residual capacity building, and synthesis work. So, there is not a lot of fieldwork going on. The two main activities we'll have in the coming months will be (i) a repeat of the RHOMIS survey (we need some time series data) and (ii) a quantitative/qualitative study on the gendered impacts of some of the technologies of Africa RISING. The second study will interface with our RHOMIS studies as well. So there are many activities going on and other kinds of activities around the exit strategy. But I think this item also needs to be viewed in light of the 2nd agenda.
  • CA: The main activities in terms of fieldwork are the Mali follow-up data collection that finished at the end of January. So, we are now preparing the data for analysis and sharing. Our second fieldwork activity will be in Tanzania. The fieldwork should start in mid/end of April. We are also working on several studies on the impact of SI interventions in various countries and the RoI, and we are collaborating with IITA and others. An update is that one of our research assistants, Arkadeep, has recently left, and we are seeking to replace him. He was primarily responsible for taking care of the data management and coordinating the survey.

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?
  • BV: The last time we discussed how the new CGIAR initiatives are linked into Africa RISING and vice-versa. We know that AR will likely (to some extent) morph into the SI-MFS Initiative. Maybe ZS could tell us a bit of the view from the donor side about that. I will also present some insights from where I am involved in the process. What I would suggest, and I would be curious also to hear from FK, PT, and CA perspectives about how people/partners you work with daily are viewing this process - what are their worries/questions related to the transition? So maybe first, ZS, please share your perspectives. There is a System Science Council meeting ongoing, but if you have any insights, that would be great.
  • ZS: There are still some ongoing internal discussions. We are keen to allow the process to develop organically and design how the activities need to interact. We still intend to invest the same funding levels from AR, CSISA, and other programs into the One CGIAR process. We are interested in ensuring continuity. An area that is still unclear to me is how the programs/initiatives will interact, e.g., SI-MFS – Excellence in Agronomy, etc. JG will have more insights to offer when he joins the call.
  • BV: Thanks for the update, ZS. You have made a key point about continuity. Discussions are still ongoing about the form and shape. All initiatives were reviewed by ISDC and were all scored on several criteria, and I think the point about interactions between the initiatives was raised. During the initiative design processes, it is true that we spent most of the time designing the initiatives and only a bit reviewing their interactions. There may be some links on the surface, but when you dig a little bit deeper, then it is hard to find sometimes.
  • FK: A. concern that has been expressed to me by colleagues has been about the level of time investment into the development of One CGIAR initiatives and whether this would be sufficient to support their work. Fortunately, we have a cushion/buffer for the moment for Africa RISING staff contributing, at least until September. This is also good for the Initiative because you have a chunk of stuff focused on contributing to the process.
  • PT: I think I recognize what FK has talked about, and even in Ethiopia, when we talk about an exit strategy, we give some thought to dovetail some AR funding into the SI-MFS. I haven't heard too much concern expressed to me regarding individual staff, but they may be there. I think that will change quickly as the more detailed planning for the Initiative starts next week with a view towards a formal inception meeting. Maybe we need to have a bit of a discussion about the actual /formal end date for Africa RISING. We have always talked about September 2022. We might want to think about whether it is advantageous to add on some 3 – 6 months, but I think that is a discussion we can first have offline and then have some suggestions 9with justifications) put forward.
  • BV: Is there anything important falling through the cracks/getting lost from Africa RISING's current content (in the work plans) and the objectives for the SI-MFS Initiative?
  • PT: Not necessarily. If you think about AR, it is kind of like rails in it, (i) intellectual thinking around SI/ development of methods, and (ii) the development partnerships integration with the research agenda. Because of how One CGIAR initiatives are set up, I think it will be a big challenge to keep the second part going. At some point, we felt that this would be a role for the regional initiatives, but this will probably be clarified soon. The broadening of the geographical focus for the SI-MFS is a good thing in principle, but for the moment, it also means that we are spreading resources more thinly. I think the right people are involved in this to make it happen. We need to think about how we are going to preserve, which I believe was a unique and very positive aspect of Africa RISING.
  • SM: The One CGIAR regional initiative for East and Southern Africa held an inception meeting last week. Unfortunately, we were all away for ILRI Senior Management Meeting during that week. Was there any Africa RISING representation at the meeting? I participated in some of the earlier discussions of that Initiative, and at that time, they talked about scaling some of the Africa RISING technologies at some of their sites. I was just curious whether that carried forward.
  • FK: Some Africa RISING colleagues took part in the meeting, like Francis Muthoni, who is also part of the SI-MFS team, and also Christian Thierfelder, who is leading work package 1 in that Initiative. There are a couple of other AR colleagues that are also involved.
  • BV: Probably what we could do is ask them – what have they seen? How do they see these interactions (between AR – the RII) taking shape? Going back to the point by PT about the AR model for R-in-D, I believe that in some areas, we were pretty innovative. How we managed to let, development goals drive the research agenda was written into the second phase proposal for AR. We had similar discussions in Excellence in Agronomy – how do we respond to scaling demands from other initiatives? And how do we get our impact pathways? Depending on other initiatives for something critical like reaching scale and creating outcomes is very risky. Therefore, in EiA, we opted to mix both – have our internal impact pathways (the use cases), but we still work with other initiatives where it makes sense. I am not sure if SI-MFS has had this discussion, but I think it would be risky not to do so and build on what AR has been achieving over the past few years. Prioritization of who to work with on what is also key because you can't work with everyone.
  • PT: That is a good point, BV. I was just making the point that it will be a challenge for us to make that happen with the breadth of expectations and with likely initial funding. So, I think FK this is something we discuss as we go forward. Other stuff from AR and others like CSISA has been nicely assimilated into the SI-MFS.
  • BV: Maybe that is a good point for follow-up with the two relevant regional initiatives. Find out exactly what/how do we reinforce transitioning of AR work with them.


Action: BV to follow up with Christian Thierfelder, Francis Muthoni, and others involved in the RIIs about synergies and work transitions between AR and the initiatives. Report back at the next PCT meet.

Possibility for making a program-wide close-out event for Africa RISING

  • JO: Key questions about this topic are that if we are talking about a September 2022 end-date, it would probably be good to have a close-out event. So the word 'learning' is perhaps not appropriate. What shape/form would this event take? Should we have a virtual/in-person or hybrid? Is there value/ interest in having such an event? Underneath these questions was the suggestion that this event could be linked up with a seminar organized in collaboration with the USAID Agrilinks platform to get a bigger audience. And if we do that, what form of 'packaging' would be best and of interest.
  • FK: I would support having a close-out event for the program. The event can be a hybrid. This would be a good platform where we can harvest emerging insights from colleagues about the work that has been done and share amongst themselves and highlight the loose ends that are at risk of being dropped. It would also be a chance to identify low-hanging fruits for transitioning to the new initiatives. The last point I would like to mention is that maybe JO could also use this as a platform where we harness some ideas around the material you would like to have in the end-of-program report "strides in SAI."
  • BV: I just saw a comment in the chat that virtual is not essential. Can we have an in-person event? Because the quality of virtual events is not usually so good. The linkage with Agrilinks can be done separately. The other question would be, what would be the agenda for the meeting? Usually, PT, FK, and CA put together some ideas that we can then look at during the next PCT meeting. We also need to think about the timing because the longer we wait, the less relevant it becomes as the Initiatives take off with their plans.
  • ZS: We are opening up for travels, and my preference would be that we try to make the event in-person as much as possible. There is still going to be likely some need for a hybrid arrangement.
  • FK: I think September would be ideal considering that most people will be on holiday in June/July/August.
  • PT: If the SI-MFS inception would hold somewhere around May/June (per the earlier proposals), we could also build in some kind of follow-up from that meeting into the AR close-out event in September.
  • CA: I think FK has made good points about the dates. Most of the lessons emerging from the studies we are conducting will be somewhere around May/June, so we could also possibly already feed these into the SI-MFS inception.


Action: JO, FK, CA, and PT to develop a draft plan /agenda for the close-out event sometime in September. PCT to review the draft and help concretize plans for the event at the PCT meeting.

Joint harmonization knowledge legacy products at the Program level

  • FK: This agenda item was about bringing these knowledge products that would give thought leadership in SI, mechanization, and livestock. Management. Three of those paper drafts are ready for submission to journal papers. The material draws from all three Africa RISING regional projects. So, this is just an update, and no action is required from the PCT. We have had some challenges with livestock management, and this is not likely to progress further.
Retrieved from "https://africa-rising-wiki.net/index.php?title=Pct47&oldid=487741"