File:Vision of success and targets - V2.docx

2018-09-20T19:00:38Z

Carloifpri:

File:Sketch - AR - Vision of success - V3.pptx

2018-09-20T19:00:37Z

Carloifpri:

File:Sketch - AR - Vision of success - V3.jpg

2018-09-20T19:00:31Z

Carloifpri:

Program strategy workshop Vision

2015-10-13T20:02:05Z

Carloifpri: Imported from Wikispaces

(''This work stream was led by Bernard van Lauwe and Carlo Azzarri'').

''See the files from this work stream:''
[[:File:Sketch - AR - Vision of success - V3.pptx]][[:File:Vision of success and targets - V2.docx]]

'''Work Stream – Vision of Success for Africa RISING phase II'''

'''Introduction'''
à Innovations created by AR fit within a certain context (related to, e.g., market access, agro-ecological conditions, typology status). The potential impact of those innovations is determined by this context (that can change during project implementation).
à The current notes describe the various influences that AR will create in its second phase, a preliminary definition of those influences, linkages with other Work Streams, and comments received during the presentation of these notes.

'''Progression in terms of impact targets'''
'''Trends targeted by AR'''
à Trend 1: The number of households with which AR is '''working directly''' to develop, test, and validate innovations. These households will experience '''SI benefits''' through AR.
à Trend 2a: The number of households that will '''‘adopt’''' AR innovations in close cooperation with development partners/initiatives that have been identified during the proposal development phase and which whom there are clear agreements on how to cooperate during phase 2 of the project. This total number of households needs to be agreed upon during project formulation. These households will experience '''SI benefits''' through AR.
à Trend 2b: Same as Trend 2a but with partners/initiatives that had not been contacted prior to the start of phase 2. Partnership platforms could be a way to interest such partners/ initiatives to cooperate with AR. The total number of such households cannot be anticipated in advance of phase 2.
à Trend 3a: The number of households that are '''aware of''' and could adopt the innovations (for which the context is right) within USAID Zones of Influence. The slight increase in this number is related to population growth. These households '''may not necessarily experience SI benefits''' through AR but through other actors.
à Trend 3b: Same as Trend 3a but for an area beyond USAID Zones of Influence (e.g. a country).
[[File:Sketch - AR - Vision of success - V3.jpg|800x600px]]
'''Value created'''
à The green line concerns situations whereby a partner works together with AR with a common household target of household (e.g., NAFAKA and AR in Tanzania). NAFAKA has a target of, e.g., 50,000 households. AR will use the same targets since AR itself is not going to set up dissemination networks. To avoid double-counting, it is important to define the added value of AR.
à The value created by AR equals [number of households] * (Value created per household with AR engagement – Value created per household without AR engagement)
à Note that in a case where a partner has been working with AR in the past and has acquired all the knowledge and skills needed to advance AR products, then such partner would not be one that AR phase II can engage with since there would be not added value per household reached.

'''Definition of terms used'''
'''Aware'''
à Households that are aware of a certain innovation and that are able to act on that awareness
'''‘Adoption’'''
à Note: We are defining ‘adoption’ as per below description. This is not really adoption ''strictu sensu'' so a better term to describe this situation may be required
à Farmers ‘adopt’ if they access, test, modify, and use an innovation (note that ‘facilitation’ of any component of the innovation is excluded); this can be assessed as changes in practices (compared to a baseline situation)
à ‘Use’ should be defined in terms of, e.g., number of cattle, acreage of land.
à The timing of application of changes in practices should also be considered, e.g., over 2 growing seasons in case of an agronomy intervention (noting that some interventions, e.g., vaccination, only need to happen once).
à The final definition needs to add values/thresholds to the above.
à Disadoption needs to be considered in the final values (project impact = adoption minus disadoption).
'''SI Benefits'''
à Benefits are linked to the 5 domains of the SI M&E framework.
à Some innovations can target one of the 5 domains but care should be taken that improvement in one dimension does not go at the cost of one or more other dimensions.

'''Linkages to other Work streams'''
à Benefits: SI framework Work Stream
à Adoption: Targets, Scaling, Farmer engagement, ToC and Impact Pathway Work Streams

'''Comments received during presentation'''
à Which are the important assumptions underlying the presented logic?
à Is capacity to innovate (individual or collective) part of success?

'''Comments put forward by participants in the feedback session:'''
* Assumptions are important
* SI capacity to innovate (individual or collective) part of success

[[File:Vision of success1.jpg]][[File:Vision of success.jpg]]

africa-rising-wiki - User contributions [en]

File:Vision of success and targets - V2.docx

File:Sketch - AR - Vision of success - V3.pptx

File:Sketch - AR - Vision of success - V3.jpg

Program strategy workshop Vision