1

Bringingevidencetobearonnegotiatingecosystemserviceandlivelihoodtrade-offsin

sustainableagriculturalintensificationinTanzania,EthiopiaandZambiaaspartoftheSAIRLA

program

AddisAbaba,EthiopiaNationalSHAREDWorkshop,March30th–31st2017

Workshopreport

ReportpreparedbyMiekeBourne,ConstanceNeelyandHadiaSeid(ICRAF)

2

Tableofcontents1. Officialopening....................................................................................................32. Introductionsandworkshopobjectives...............................................................42.1. Workshopobjectivesandflow.....................................................................42.3. Introductiontotheproject...........................................................................52.3. Gatheringperspectives................................................................................8

3. StakeholderApproachtoRiskInformedandEvidenceBaseDecisionMaking(SHARED) 104. ProcessfordevelopingpoliciesandinvestmentdecisionsrelatedtoSAI..........115. SustainableAgriculturalIntensification(SAI)interventionsandscalingsuccessesinEthiopia......................................................................................................................146. RootcauseanalysisofkeybarrierstoscalingSAIpractices...............................197. PoliciesinsupportofscalingSAI........................................................................228. Baselinedataandstakeholdermaps:Feedback................................................249. TheSAIInteractiveDashboard...........................................................................2410. Trade-offAnalysis...............................................................................................2611. OptionsframeworkforscalingSAI.....................................................................2712. NextSteps,EvaluationandClose.......................................................................29Appendix1Participantlist.....................................................................................31Appendix2Agenda................................................................................................32Appendix3Baselineresults...................................................................................33

Suggestedcitation:BourneM,NeelyCandSeidH.2017.AddisAbaba,Ethiopia,NationalSHAREDWorkshop,March30th–31st2017:WorkshopReport.Bringingevidencetobearonnegotiatingecosystemserviceandlivelihoodtrade-offsinsustainableagriculturalintensificationinTanzania,EthiopiaandZambiaaspartoftheSAIRLAprogram.WorldAgroforestryCentre(ICRAF),Kenya.Disclaimer:NeitherDFID,norWYGnortheUniversityofGreenwich-NaturalResourcesInstituteareresponsibleforcontentinthisdocument.

TheSustainableIntensificationofAgriculturalResearchandLearninginAfrica(SAIRLA)ProgrammeisaUKDepartmentforInternationalDevelopment-fundedinitiativethatseekstoaddressoneofthemostintractableproblemsfacingsmall-holderfarmersinAfrica-howtoengageinthemarketeconomyandtodeliversustainableintensificationofagriculture,thatis,whichavoidsnegativeimpactsontheenvironment.SAIRLAwillgeneratenewevidencetohelpwomenandpoorAfricansmallholderfarmersdevelopenvironmentallyandfinanciallysustainableenterprisesandboostproductivity.Theresearchwillfocusnon-exclusivelyon6countries(BurkinaFaso,Ethiopia,Ghana,Malawi,TanzaniaandZambia),thuscomplementingotherresearcheffortsintheseregions.

3

1. OfficialopeningDr.WubalemTadesse,theDirectorGeneraloftheEthiopianEnvironmentandForestResearchInstitute(EEFRI),officiallyopenedtheworkshop.HeprovidedsomebackgroundtotheworkshopbyoutliningthattheSustainableAgriculturalIntensificationResearchandLearninginAfrica(SAIRLA)projectisafive-yearprogramme(2015to2020)fundedbytheUKDepartmentofInternationalDevelopment.Theprojectseekstogeneratenewevidenceanddesigntoolstoenablegovernments,investorsandotherkeyactorstodelivermoreeffectivepoliciesandinvestmentsinsustainableagriculturalintensification(SAI)thatstrengthenthecapacityofpoorerfarmers’,especiallywomenandyouth,toaccessandbenefitfromSAI.SAIRLAhascommissionedresearchandwillfacilitatemulti-scalelearningtounderstanddifferentwaysofachievingSAIanditsdevelopmentalimplications.InEthiopiafourresearchprojectsarebeingimplementedandtheseare:• Bringingevidencetobearonnegotiatingecosystemserviceandlivelihood

trade-offsinsustainableagriculturalintensificationledbyICRAF• SmallholderRiskManagementSolutions(SRMS)LedbyICRISAT• Whatworkswhereforwhichfarmer:combiningleandataandcrowdsourcingfor

household-specifictargetingofagriculturaladvisoryservicesLedbyBioversityInternational

• ResearchandLearningforSustainableintensificationofSmallholderLivestockValueChainsLedbyEnvironmentandClimateResearchCenter/ECRC

Photo:Dr.WubalemTadesse,DirectorGeneraloftheEEFRI

Dr.WubalemTadesseinformedthegroupthattheoverallobjectiveoftheICRAFledSAIRLAprojectistobuildinterdisciplinaryresearchprogramme,toincreasetheuptakeofcontextappropriateSAIinnovationsinEastandsouthernAfricathroughevidencegeneration,dataanalyticsandthedevelopmentofinnovativetoolsforstakeholderengagementwithevidence.

4

HesaidhewasconfidentthatthefindingsandresultsoftheseactivitiesthatarebeingimplementedinEthiopiawillprovidetheaddedknowledge,technicalknowhowandcapabilitiesforEthiopiadrylandareatobetterconserveandmanagelandresources,aswellastoensurethatproperlandresourceutilizationissustainableinthelongterm.Finally,hethankedICRAFEthiopiaofficeinparticular,aswellastheorganizersfortheirexcellentarrangementsforholdingtheNationalWorkshopandwishedthegroupfruitfuldeliberationinbringingevidencetobearonnegotiatingecosystemserviceandlivelihoodtrade-offsinsustainableagriculturalintensificationinEthiopiaProjectandforUKDepartmentofInternationalDevelopmentfuturesupportandfunding.

2. IntroductionsandworkshopobjectivesDr. Mamusha Lemma asked individuals from the national and local government, NGO’s,research centers and the World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF) to introduce themselves (seeAppendix1fortheparticipants information).Expectationsfromthegroupweretolearnandshareinformationandtoseehowevidencecanbeusedtosupportthecommunity.

2.1. WorkshopobjectivesandflowDr.MamushaLemmasharedtheworkshopobjectiveswiththegroup:

• Engage country stakeholders using the SHARED methodology to reflect on currentSustainableAgriculturalIntensification(SAI)-relevantinterventions,scalingmechanismsandindicatorsincludingevidenceandgaps.

• Capture and discuss current and potential policy and investment decision makingapproachestoenhancescalingofSAI-relevantinterventionsinEthiopia.

• ReflectonimportanttradeoffsthemesandindicatorsforSAIinterventionsinEthiopia.• DiscussionaroundtheSAIDashboardtobedeveloped.

Healsooutlinedtheworkshopagenda(seeAppendix2forthefullagenda).Workshopflow

5

Figure1:WorkshopFlow–forDay1andDay2.

Houserulesfortheworkshop

- Phonesonsilentoroff- Nosidetalks- Effectiveuseoftime- Activeparticipationexpectedfromallparticipants- Bepunctualasmuchaspossibleandassignatimemanager- Attentionandfocus- Respectothersideasandopinions- Computersoff- Shareexperiences- Avoidmovinginandoutinthemiddleofpresentations

2.3. IntroductiontotheprojectDr.Mamushaintroducedtheproject,includingtheaim,activitiesandconceptualframework.HeoutlinedthatinEthiopiahistoricallytherewasexpansionintonewlandsbutwithgreaterpopulations of humans and livestock this is no longer possible. To feed the increasingpopulation,nowweneedtointensifyagriculturalpracticestoincreaseproduction,thismustbedonesustainably.The concept of SAI developed in response to the need for approaches that increase foodproduction in response to the demand of a growing population while conserving criticalecosystem services. A key premise is that increased food production should not lead toencroachmentintoprotectedbiodiversityhotspots.Theprojectaims tobuildan interdisciplinary researchprogrammeto increase theuptakeofcontext-appropriateSAIinnovationsinEastandsouthernAfricathroughevidencegeneration,data analytics and the development of innovative tools for stakeholder engagement withevidence.

OpeningandStageSetting

SAIInterventionsandScaling

CurrentDecisionMaking

Approach

BarriersandRootCauses

PoliciesinSupportofSAI

BaselineResults Social

AccesstoEvidence

Trade-OffsThemesandIndicators

NextStepsandClosing

Day1

Day2

OptionstoEnhanceScalingof

6

He outlined the project is part of a larger programme: the Sustainable AgriculturalIntensification Research and Learning in Africa (SAIRLA) funded by the UK Department forIntegratedDevelopmentfundandmanagedbyWygandUniversityofGreenwich.ThewholeprogramhaseightprojectsinsixAfricanCountries,fourofwhichareinEthiopia.InEthiopia,thisICRAFledSAIRLAprojectisinZiway.Fivemajorprojectactivities:

1. Baselineassessment,includinguseofandexistingevidenceontheeffectivenessofSAI2. Engage stakeholder groups using the SHARED approach to reflect on SAI-relevant

policies&interventions3. Multi-scale,socio-ecologicaltrade-offanalysisconductedonpromisingSAIinterventions

andresultscommunicatedandassessedwithstakeholdersusingtheSHAREDapproach.4. Facilitatepilotingofpromising, innovativeSAI interventions,usingmixedmethods to

assesstheircost-effectiveness5. Developaninteractive,openaccessplatform—’SAIDashboard’—forprojectactionsites

tosupporttheengagementofdecisionmakerstointeractwithevidence.

7

Dr.Mamushaoutlinedthattheprojectworksacrossmultiplescales:

Figure2:ConceptualFrameworkoftheprojectwiththeStakeholderEngagementsegmenthighlighted.

8

• Incorporatesspatiallyexplicitanalysesofindicatorsoflandandsoilhealthaswellashumanwell-beingacrossscales.

• Co-production of socio-ecological datasets will be used to conductmulti-scale trade-offanalysistoinformandprioritizeSAIinterventions.

Projectactivitiestodate:• StakeholderworkshopinZiway,September2016

o DevelopedaStakeholderMappingGuideusingSHAREDapproacho GapsandopportunitiesforSAIatmultiplescales(district,regional,national)

• Baselinesurveyandstakeholdermappingexercise,September-October2016• ParticipatoryFarmerIdentificationofPrioritizedSAIPracticesandIndicatorsofSuccessin

Ziway,February2017• Initial collation of appropriate data for socio-ecological trade-off analysis on SAI

interventions,February2017

2.3. GatheringperspectivesDr. Constance Neely asked participants to respond to a number of statements and movethemselvestoaplaceintheroom,nexttoacardthatreflectstheirview.Thisexerciseaimstostarttheconversationonsustainableagriculturalintensificationamongparticipants.

Figure3:Illustrationofthegatheringperspectiveactivity.

StatementOne:SustainableAgricultural Intensification (SAI) includeseconomic, socialandenvironmentaldimensionsMostparticipantsagreedstronglywiththisstatement.Someofthereasonswere:• As longassustainabledevelopment ismentioned,all theelementsare linked.ForSAIall

threeelements(economic,socialandenvironmental)arehighlyinterrelated.• Fromtheperspectiveofthefarmer,iftheplotoflandisnotsustainablymanagementthe

economicandsocialpartsofhislifewillbedestroyed.• ThewordofSAItouchesthevaluechainwhichhasalotofaspectsincludingalltheelements.

9

Photo:Dr.Neelyaskingparticipantstheirreasonforstronglyagreeingoragreeingwiththefirststatement.

Someparticipantsagreed:• Agreewithstatementbutneedtoaddtechnologytothethreeelements.• Sometimescannotaddressallthreeelementssoneedtocompromisebetweenthethree

elements.• Needtoaddthepolicydimensionandculturalissuestothethreeelements.StatementTwo:SustainableAgriculturalIntensification(SAI)isbuildinguponwhatisalreadybeingpracticesinthecountryInresponsetothisstatement,manyparticipantsmovedtoagree,neutralordisagree.Someoftheexplanationsfordisagreeingwiththestatementincluded:• SAIisbringinganewapproachashavebeenfollowingasingletypeofinterventionandSAI

ismovingtoacomplexapproach.• Notjustbuildingupon,needtoenhancewhatwasbeingpracticed.Neutral:• Cannotbringsomethingcompletelynewbutnotnecessarilybuildingonsomethinginthe

country.• NotallSAIinterventionsarebeingpracticedinthecountryalready,thereisaneedtolearn

fromothers.Agree:• Sometimesourinterventionsfailaswedonotbuilduponwhatpeoplearepracticing.The

good entry point for our interventions is understanding what people are doing at thehouseholdlevelandthenenhanceorstrengthenfromthere.

• Havetodefine‘buildingupon’indicatesexistingexperienceinthecountry.Doesn'tmeanweneedtoreplicatethewrongexperiencebutweneedtolookintothebestexperience.Therearesomepracticesbuthaveissueswithsynergyandcomplementarityinthewaywework.

10

Additional comment:Something inonepartof thecountry that isworkingmaynotwork inanotherpartofthecountry.StatementThree:SustainableAgriculturalIntensification(SAI)hasnotbeenadoptedwidelyduetoalackofinformationandevidenceParticipantshadvariedresponsestothisstatement.Forthosethatdisagreed,someopinionsarehighlighted:• Someinformationisthereandthefarmersknowaboutthepracticesbuttheydonotpractice

themduetoreluctancetopractice.• There are cases in private investment, where environmental impact assessment cannot

comeintoeffect,forexampleflowerfarms.• National level information is availablebut location specific information ismissing. Policy

informationistherebutimplementationandenforcementissuesremainasachallenge.Neutral:• Thereareotherreasonsfornon-adoption,evidencemayplayarole.• Atworedalevel,accesstoinformationistheissueratherthanthepresenceofinformation.Agree:• There are various reasons including lack of access to information and evidence, this is

howeveronlyoneoftheproblems.Agreefully:• There isnoevidenceonwhattraditionalpractices(forexampletheuseoffertilizers)are

moreeffectiveunderwhatconditions.Theevidenceisnotavailableinlocalcontextandnoteasilyaccessible.

3. StakeholderApproachtoRiskInformedandEvidenceBaseDecisionMaking(SHARED)

Dr. Constance Neely introduced the SHARED methodology. The SHARED methodology is atailoredprocessthatbuildsinteractionbetweenpeopleandaccessibleevidencefordecisionsthatyieldsustainableimpact.Evidence isdifferentknowledgesystems including localandtraditionalknowledgeaswellasscientificdataandresults.Whatisit?

• Ademanddrivenengagementstructureforco-learningandco-negotiationofactionstoachievemutuallyagreedupondevelopmentoutcomes.

• The SHARED supports that decision-making must be inclusive, embrace complexity,inform risk and identify investment priorities through evidence and effectively trackprogress.

• TheSHAREDdoessobyconveningandfacilitatingtheintegrationofdiverseknowledgesystems,sectorsandinstitutions.

Whydoweneedit?• Complexandinter-relatedproblems.• Prioritizinginvestmentswillaccelerateimpacts.• A structured process that focuses on co-learning and co-negotiation enhances

agreementandownershipofactionstoachievelongtermoutcomes.

11

Figure4:FourinterlinkedphasesoftheSHAREDmethodology.

Shealsohighlightedthatinordertohaveresilientlandscapes,wehavetopayattentiontothoseecosystemfunctionsthatunderlieandthatandweneedtopayattentiontothemanagersofthoseecosystems.TheecosystemfunctionandthelandmanagersunderpinhowweachieveournationalandinternationaltargetsandtheSDGs.Dr.NeelysharedanexampleofTurkanaCountyinKenyaandthedevelopmentofthedashboardto enhance decision making. More information about SHARED can be accessed at:http://www.worldagroforestry.org/shared.

4. ProcessfordevelopingpoliciesandinvestmentdecisionsrelatedtoSAI

The participants were asked to break into groups of National government, Regional (Zone,woreda)governmentandprojectbasedandthinkabouttheagriculturesector.Eachgroupwasasked tohavea conversationbasedon their experienceofpolicydevelopment,planningorinvestmentdecisionsandanswer:– Howareobjectivesorgoalsdecided?– Whoisinvolvedtheprocess?– Whatevidenceisusedinyourdecisionmakingprocess?Thisexerciseistobetterunderstandanddiscussprocessesofpolicydevelopment.ProjectbasedgroupresponseObjectivesandgoalsdecidedby:– Needassessmenttoidentifychallengesandsetofobjectivesandgoals

12

– Conductparticipatoryneedsassessment,basedongroupstosetobjectivesandgoals– Continuousfieldobservationstoidentifiedchallengesandsetobjectivesandgoals– Annual/quarterlyreviewmeetingswithstakeholderstoidentifiedchallengesandset

objectivesandgoals– DeskreviewtosetobjectivesThoseinvolvedintheprocess:– Projectworker/staff– Farmers/community/differentgroups– Woreda,zonalgovernmentstaffatdifferentlevels– Federalministries.Note:agreementwithgovernment,below2millionsignwithzone,

abovewithregionandthenlargerprojectswiththenationallevel– Researchers– Developmentpartnerstaff– Universityrepresentatives– Donors– PrivatesectorsEvidenceuse:– Conductingcommunitymeetinganalysedataandusethedataasanevidence– Observationfromfieldvisit– Onfarmdemonstration– Secondarydata(research,publications)– Outputfromrapidassessmentintheprojectareas– Datafromkeyinformantinterviews– Governmentandprioritiesatnationallevel–policiesandstrategies– Mediaoutputs– Minutesfromtaskforces– Evidencefrominformationsources(meteorologyagencies)Regionallevel(government)groupresponseSelectedlandcertificationissueasonepolicyissueObjectivesorgoalsaredecidedthrough:– Participatoryorconsultativediscussionatthedifferentlevels,problemidentificationof

prioritizationbasedonitsseverity.Thoseinvolvedintheprocess:– Districtleadersandadministrativeleaders– Technicalexperts– Communityleaders– Communitymembers– NGOsEvidenceuse:– Presenceoflandresources(areaetc)

13

– Populationnumber– Landtenureinsecurityandotherinformationaroundlandincludingarea– Womeninvolvement/empowermentNationallevel(government)groupresponse

Photo:Nationallevelgroupdiscussingtheirpolicyformationprocess

Objectivesorgoalsaredecidedthrough:– Situationanalysisanddefinitionofproblems(nationalprioritiesthatarealreadysetout)– Suggestionsofobjectives,harmonizingwithnationalstrategies– Alignwiththevisionandmission(alignpolicyproblemwithobjectiveforthesector)Thoseinvolvedintheprocess:– Sectorministries(mandated)– Researchinstitutes/academiaentitiesnational,regionalandinternational– Civilsociety– Multilateralandbilateralagencies– Policymakers– PublicEvidenceuse:– Researchoutputs(internationalandnational)– Surveyreports– Publicopinionthroughinterviews– Fieldobservations– SatellitedataDiscussionpoint:Satellitedataandpopulationdataforexamplecanbedifficulttoaccessevenifthedataexists.Needforgreaterinteractiontoenhanceaccesstoevidence.

14

5. SustainableAgriculturalIntensification(SAI)interventionsandscalingsuccessesinEthiopiaParticipantswereaskedtoidentifysuccessfulinterventionsandprojectsinEthiopiainordertoidentifykeyelementsofsuccess.CaseexamplesofSAIscalinginEthiopiaAfricaRisingexample(ILRI,CYMMIT,ICRAF,)AfricaRisingisafiveyearprogramwiththreeprojects,workingacrossfivecountriesinAfrica.InEthiopia,mostinterventionsareinthehighlandswitheachregionselectingtwokebelesineachoffourworedasforinterventions.Itisanactionresearchprojectwhichincludedon-farmdemonstrationsofnew technologiesandbestpractice for crop,water,highvalue treesandlivestock. Theproject is participatory andengagesdifferent government levels, farmers andresearchers.ThenewphaseoftheprojectinitiatedinOctober2016andfocusesonscalingouttonewworeda’sbasedonsuccesses.Challengeswereencounteredaroundexpectationsandtheorganisationinvolvedhavedifferentprioritiessocoordinationcanbechallengingattimebutthebenefitsarealsothereofworkingwithmultipleorganisationsandexpertise.WatershedmanagementinGundoGundoWorkedintwokebelesandwassuccessfulinscalingupconservationthroughagroforestryandforestryplantations.Challengeswereencounteredwiththesteeptopographywhichrequiredmore labour to complete the work. Additionally, community expectations were sometimesgreaterthanthebudgetcoulddeliver.Comment:theprojectmayhavebeensuccessfulinwatershedprotectionbutwasitsustainablein the long term for livelihood benefits and the wider landscape. For example, when onewatershedisprotected,thecommunitymovetoanotherwatershedtoaccessresourcessuchastrees.ConservationAgriculturewithTrees(CAWT)CAWTwasintroducedintotwokebeleswith40farmersselected.CAWTincludestheintegrationoftreesintothecroppingfieldwiththethreeconservationagricultureprinciplesofminimumsoildisturbance,croprotationorintercroppingandsoilcover.Farmersfacedmanychallengesinadoptingthepracticeat firstsofielddaysandfarmer-to-farmerapproacheswereusedtoenhancethepracticeofCAWTasfarmerscouldseethebenefits.NationalprogramoninstitutionalstrengtheningforforestrysectordevelopmentledbyMEF-CCThisprojectworkedinthreeregionsSNNP,NorthernanAmharainnineworedas.Itisaresultsbased program which also looks at job creation and livelihood diversification. Differentmeetingswereheldatmultiplelevelsandimplementationistakingplacenow.Onechallengeisthattheprogramissomethingnewtothecommunitysopeoplearesuspicious.SAIinterventionoptionsandpreferencesinZiwayHadia Seid presented the SAI intervention options that were identified in a district levelworkshopinZiwayandthenprioritizedthroughaparticipatoryprocessbymenandwomenfrom

15

thetwodifferentagroecologicalzonesinthedistrict(Table1)Someoftheprioritizedoptionswillbesupportedthroughon-farmtesting.

Photo:HadiaSeid(ICRAF)presentingtheSAIinterventionoptionsthatwereidentifiedandprioritizedatdistrictandlocallevelsinZiway.

Table1:SAIinterventionoptionsidentifiedandprioritizedinZiway

SAIinterventionoptionsfromDistrictlevel

PrioritySAIpracticesatlocallevelformenandwomenfromtwoagroecologicalzonesWomeninmoistlowland

Meninmoistlowland

Womenindrylowland

Menindrylowland

Soilandwaterconservation(on-farm)

√ √ √

Areaenclosureforcommunallands

√

Seed/seedlingproduction √(seedmultiplication)

√(treeseedling)

√(seedling)

Compostpreparationandapplication

√ √ √

Cropdiversification √ √Intercropping √ √Croprotation √Afforestation/reforestation √ Inorganicfertilizer √ √ Homegardenagroforestry √ √ √ √Onfarmagroforestry √ √ √

16

Theparticipantsthenbrokeintothreegroups.Onegrouplookedattheinterventionsandaddedother thatwere relevant toEthiopiaaswell as identifyingnationalpriorities, anothergroupdiscussedscalingmechanismsandthethirdgrouplookedatindicatorsforsuccessfulscaling.SAIoptionadditionsandnationalprioritiesThegroupaddedtotheSAI interventionoptionsfromZiway,groupedthe interventions intocrop, natural resource management (NRM) and livestock and identified the nationalgovernmentprioritieswithaP.Crop– integratedcropmanagement(intercropping,rotation,diversification)– cropresidue– bio-fertiliser(P)(usedforlegumesandisbecomingapriority)– mechanisationforsmallscalefarmers(P)– post-harvest(P)NRM– vermi-compostpreparation(wheat,legumestrawbutcoffeehuskthebest–farmersalso

sellworms)– rangelandmanagement– waterharvestingintegratedwithdripirrigation(P)– ecosystemrestoration(P)– soilandwaterconservationon-farm(P)– integratedsoilfertilitymanagement(P)– seedproduction(P)Livestock– beekeeping– otherlivestockpractice– rangelandmanagement– poultry– sheepandgoat– geneticintensification(P)– feedandforage(P)Discussionpoint:Manyofthesepracticesareimplementedindividuallybyagovernmentsectorbutthereispotentialtobundleinterventionssuchasforageandbeekeeping.TheSAIinterventionswererankedbyparticipantswitheachpersonlistingthetopthreetheybelievewouldbesuccessfulormorelikelytobeadopted,basedontheirpersonalexperienceandexpertise.TheresultsareoutlinedinTable2withthemostpopularoptionslistedfirst.

17

Table2:SAIinterventionsconsideredmostlikelytobesuccessfulorbeadoptedbyparticipants.

SAIinterventionoptions NumberofparticipantsthatlisteditHomegardenagroforestry 5Soilandwaterconservation 5Agroforestry(general) 3Areaenclosure 2Waterharvestingwithdripirrigation 2Intercropping 2On-farmagroforestry 1Treeplantationestablishment 1Sheepandgoatproduction 1Compost 1Cropdiversification 1Livestock 1Rangeland 1HVTseedlingproductiontechniques 1Seedproduction 1Croprotation 1Cropdiversification 1Small-scalemechanisation 1Post-harvestmanagement 1Inorganicfertilizer 1Fatteningandfoddercropproduction 1Waterharvesting 1Integratedsoilfertilitymanagement 1MechanismsforscalingSAINational- Policydialogue- Documentationanddissemination- Mediaengagement- Technologypackages- Agriculturalinformationsystem- Stakeholderengagement- TrainingpackagesSub-national- Unions/cooperatives- Themedia- Fielddays- Micro-finance- Researchreviews- Multi-stakeholderplatforms

18

Local- Fielddays- Exchangevisits- Ruralinstitutions- Linkagefacilitation- Incentivemechanisms- Themedia- Farmerresearchextensiongroups- Modelfarmerdissemination- Farmertrainingcentre- Agri-businessagents- CommunityempowermentDiscussionpoints:thegenderdimensionofthesescalingmechanismsshouldbeconsidered.Oneparticipantaddedthatforcapacitydevelopmentandawarenesscreationcanusetrainingoftrainersandgeneraltrainingwhilefortechnologydisseminationuse:demonstrations,fielddays,mediaevents,SMS,scalingupbestbettechnologies,manualsandmaterialsinlocallanguageIndicatorsofsuccessfulSAIscalingShortterm:• NumberofhouseholdsusingSAI• Changeinyield/productivity• Reductionofwaterandsoilloss(degradation)• Efficientutilization(management)ofnaturalresources(soil,water,land)–howto

measure?(reductionoflanddegradation)• Changeinskill,attitudeofuser–howtomeasure?Longterm:• Lifestylechange/livelihoodimprovement• Policyandstrategychange/alignment• Ecosystemresilience• Landcoverchange• BehaviourchangeComments:• Measurethetrendsasanindicatorbeingmeasuredatonepointintimecouldgivethe

wronginformation• Midandshorttermcouldbequantitativeandlongtermqualitative• Needtogetclearontheindicators(andspecific–nogeneralisation)andalsohowdowe

knowwhenthingsarenotworking• Indicators must be measurable (more important in the short term?) mention how the

indicatorswillbemeasured• IndicatorshavetobemeasurableandSMART,ifwemisssomethingontheindicatorsweare

messedupfurtherdowntheroad,• Criticalareafordiscussionandthisexerciseisjustastartingpoint

19

6. RootcauseanalysisofkeybarrierstoscalingSAIpracticesParticipantsworkedingroupstoidentifybarrierstoscalingSAIandthentherootcausesofthesebarriersasoutlinedbelow.Barriers• Capacitylimitation(coordination,implementation,monitoringandlearning)• Resourcelimitation(incapacitytoraiseresource)/mobilisation• Lackofownershipandcommitmentsbyinstitutions• Tendencytofollowcampaignbasedapproach• Lackofcoordinationamongplayers• Complexity• Householdeconomy• Lackofawareness• Variationinrateofadoption• EconomicpushfactorsnottoacceptSAI• Reluctanceonpracticingnewtechnologies/practices• Shorttermplanningbehaviourinsteadoflongterm(insearchofimmediateresults)• Affordabilityatthelevelofthefarmer(economic)• Lackofaccesstotechnologies• Knowledgegap• Culturalbarriers• Searchforimmediateresults(NRtechnologies–farmersneedimmediateresults)• Poorinstitutionsandlackofsystematiccapacity• Technologycomplexity• Economyofthefarmer• Lackofawarenessbythefarmersofthetechnology• VariationinadoptionratesRootcausemappingEachgrouptochooseoneofthebarrierstounpack,consideringthecauseofeachelement.

20

Photo:Participantdescribinghisgroupsrootcausemap.

21

Figure5:Therootcausemapsdevelopedbyfourgroups.Thebarrierbeingconsideredisshadedandtherootcausesindicated.Similarrootcauseswithinandacrossgroupsareshownbydoublelines.

22

7. PoliciesinsupportofscalingSAIParticipantswereaskedifscalingSAIcontributetonationalorinternationalcommitmentsortargetsandtheyagreedthattheanswerwasyes.ThetargetsthatwouldbeadvancedthroughSAIscalingwereoutlinedas:– Povertyreductiontarget(livelihoodoptions)– Sustainability– Foodsecurity– Nutritionsecurity– Economicdevelopment– AFR100,Bonnchallenge,degradationneutrality– Biodiversity(Aiche)– Climatechange–mitigationtargetsINDC’s,adaptationSomeofthepoliciesandstrategiesrelevanttoSAIscalinginEthiopiawereoutlinedbyMiekeBourneandareshowninTable3.Table3:ElementsofthelegalandpolicyframeworkforscalingSAIinEthiopia.

Sector Approach/Mainprovisions LegalandPolicyframework

Agriculturalgrowthandfoodsecurity

-Governmentdriven-Agricultureisamajoreconomicdriver-Focusedonsmallholderfarmers-Movingtowardscommercializationandmarketorientation

-TheAgriculturalDevelopmentLedIndustrialization(ADLI)strategy-AgriculturalSectorPolicyandInvestmentFramework-GrowthandTransformationPlan-NationalFoodSecurityStrategyandtheNationalFoodSecurityProgram-Regionshavefiveyeargrowthandtransformationplans-EthiopianCommodityExchangeproclamation

Environment Legislationandpoliciesmostlyformulatedatfederallevelbutmovestocreateregionalagenciesandenvironmentalconservationstrategies.

-NationalConservationStrategy-EnvironmentalPoliciesonbiodiversity,impactassessmentandforestconservation-ClimateResilientGreenEconomystrategy

Waterresourcemanagement

-Policyandlegalframeworksupportintegratedwaterresourcemanagement.-Waterismanagementbyanumberofinstitutionsusinganintegratedwatershedmanagementapproach-Focusonhydropower,irrigationgrowthandimprovingaccesstodrinkingwater

-Watersectorpolicy,strategyandprogram-IntegratedRiverBasinDevelopmentMasterPlans-IrrigationDevelopmentPolicy-Small-scaleirrigationcapacitybuildingstrategy

Ruraleconomy(marketandfinance)

Focusoncooperatives,microandsmallenterprises(MSEs)andinputs-Microandcommunitybasedfinancialservices

-AgriculturalCooperativeSectorDevelopmentStrategy-PoliciesonMSEsandcooperatives-Agriculturalinputstrategies-EthiopianCommodityExchangeproclamation-MicrofinanceAct-Micro-FinancingBusiness

23

Participantswerethenaskedifanysignificantpoliciesweremissingfromthetable,thefollowingwerementioned:

– GrowthandTransformationPlan2016-2020replacestheGTP1andconsiderstheincorporationofdifferentsectors,whichGTP1didnotdo.

– ForestPolicies– EnergyPolicyunderdevelopment– Biomassenergystrategy(BES)– AGP2Agriculturalgrowthprogram– REDD+program– ForestSectorDevelopmentProgram(almoststartingandconsideringtenure)– ProductiveSafetyNetProgram2– PastoralMinistry–policyunderdevelopmentregardingPastoralism– GreenGrowthDevelopmentStrategy– Drylandgrazingpolicy(zerograzing)iscurrentlyunderdiscussion

ParticipantswerealsoaskediftherewereanygapsinthesepoliciestoachievesufficientscalingofSAIbyaddressingrootcausesandiftherewasanyincoherencebetweenpolicies.Thefollowingcommentsweremade:• Wehavethesepoliciesbuttheydoneedtoberevisedtokeepthemuptodate

Institutionalgapsmayexistinimplementation.Thepoliciesarethere,butthereareinstitutionalbottlenecks.

• Peopleatthenationallevelmaybeawareofthesepolicies,atzonalordistrictleveltheremaynotbeknowledgeofthese

• Policiesaresufficientbutcascadingthesepolicieshassomeproblemsofawarenessandtechnicalcapacityatthelowerlevels.Policiesmaybeexcellentorgood,coordinationisnotvisibleatthelowerlevel.

• Thefeedbackmechanismsmaybechallengingtogetinputfromthelocallevel.• Somegapsexistinsupportingforeigninvestment,alackofincentivesforprivatesector

engagement.• Forcharcoalmaking,itisillegalinthepolicybutcharcoalisbeingproduced,soa

disconnectbetweenpolicyandreality.• Implementationcapacityisahugegap.• Policiesandstrategiesaresmartbutthelegalenforcementtoimplementmaybelacking.• Toimplementpolicies,needtohaveenablingconditionssuchasfinance,supportcapacity,

informationandfacilitation.• Challengewithdifferentgovernmentlevelsforimplementation.Insomecases,the

nationalgovernmentinterferesinregionalsituations.Inothercases,thezonecanoverridetheregion.

• GreatersynergybetweensectorpoliciesispossiblethroughlinkingtotheSDGs.GTP2forexampleismorecross-sectoralthanGTP1.

• Forlanduseandforestrypoliciesthereisanincoherence,thisalsoexistswithagriculturalandpastoralpoliciesandbetweenagricultureandforestry(suchascommercialagriculturalinvestmentinforestlands).Needformoreinpolicychangeorimprovementonpolicytrade-offsbetweensectors.

24

8. Baselinedataandstakeholdermaps:FeedbackMiekeBournepresentedtheprojectbaselinedataonaccessanduseofSAIevidenceaswellasstakeholdermaps(seeAppendix3forfullresults).Somecommentsanddiscussionfollowingthepresentationincluded:– Theprivatesectorispresentbuttherearenotmanyactorsandtheyaregenerally

disconnectedfromtherestofthestakeholdernetwork.– AtthelocallevelCBOsandfarmergroupsareimportantactorsthatarenotcapturedinthe

stakeholdermaps.– WhilestakeholdersmayaccessanduseevidenceonSAItheaccuracyandqualityofthe

evidencemaybepoor.– Adashboardtocollectandinterpretinformationisneeded.– Allpeopleinterviewedwereinapositiontohaveaccesstoevidenceandother

stakeholderswithevidence.IfIdonotinternalizetheinformation.Weneedtohearthingsmultipletimestointernalize.SometakehopemessagesfromDay1were:– Berealisticaboutscalingup.– Therearekeyplayers,differentactorsandexperiencesthatweneedtobeawareofand

makeuseofthem.– AdditionalpracticesforSAI.– Indicatorsprovidedsomenewinformation.– Goodlessontodiscussandmakingadecision.Itwasproductivetocometogetherand

broadeningourwayoflookingatthings.– Importanceofincentives.– Foranytechnology,understandthebarriersfromtheadaptorspointofviewisimportant.

9. TheSAIInteractiveDashboardConstanceNeelyoutlinedthatanopen-sourceSAIinteractivedashboardwillbedevelopedforZiwaytoallowuserstointeractwithdatainameaningfulway:

• asadata-drivenplatform• tointegrateexistingandnewdataand• toproviderobustdatamanagementandgraphicaltools

Thedashboardwillcontainbothsocialandecologicaldatasetsanditwilluseacombinationofbothspatial(maps)andnon-spatialdataanalyticsandgraphics.SheranthroughsomeelementsofadashboardcreatedforTurkanaCountyinKenya.Seehttps://prezi.com/ke-myjnuet3aformoreinformationoraccessthedashboardat:http://landscapeportal.org/sharedApp/DataalreadyavailableforZiwayincludes:

• ReportsonEvergreenAgricultureinEthiopiaundertheTreesforFoodSecurityproject• Spatialdistributionpatternanddiversityoffarmlandtreespeciesinsemi-aridEast

Shewa• LocalKnowledgeofFarmersonFarmTreeManagement,EastShewaZone,Ethiopia• Assessmentoftreeseedlingnurseriesforaclimatesmartagricultureinselected

districtsofOromiastate

25

• TheagriculturalextensionsysteminEthiopia:AfocusonEastShewa,WestShewaandEastWollegazones

• HouseholdsurveydatafromtheTreesforFoodSecurityproject.Itwasoutlinedthatdataongender,socialinclusionandequityandtrade-offswaslimitedforZiway.ParticipantswereaskedwhatadditionaldatawouldbemostvaluabletohaveincludedinadashboardspecifictoZiwayandanumberofdatasourceswereidentified(Table4).Table4:AvailabledataforZiwayrelevanttoSAI.

Typeofdata Scaleofdata WhohasitBaselinestudyonlivestockandirrigation

District/PA ILRILivesproject

Zeway–Shallasubcatchmentwatershedproject

Adame-tulu-woredawatershed RiftValleysub-basinprojectAdametuluagriculturaloffice

Homegardenagroforestry District AdametuluresearchcenterSWCResearchandNRMandIrrigation

District ATRCAdametuluresearchcenter

SNVHorticultureproject District(MekiandZewaye) SNVandAdametuluagriculturaloffice

Livestock,PoultryandTrees District ATRC,AdameTuluresearchcenter

SmallscaleirrigationandonfarmSWCandmechanization

District IDE,InternationalDVTenterprises

Genderandsocialequity,smallscaleirrigation

DistrictandCommlevel RiftValleyWomensDevelopmentAssociation

Education District FH,ADRA(Adventistdevelopmentandreliefagency)foodforhunger

Emergencyseed,participatoryvarietyselection

District CIMMYT

Intercropping District ICRISATOrganizingwomengroups District IDELandhealth Agriculturalinputs/chemicalsat

farmlevelResearchinstitutionsandUniversityMEFCC

Humanpopulationdata Woreda WoredaadministrationMeteorology Agroecology/woreda METagencyMarketinformation Woreda Cooperativeandmarketing

officeintheworedaCreditfacilities Woreda MicrofinanceinstitutionsFisheries Woreda WoredaAgriculturalofficeParticipantswerealsoaskediftherewereotherdashboardsinEthiopiathattheywerefamiliarwith.Ingeneral,therewerefewexamples:

- Haveanexampleofonethatisusedforprojectmanagement- Thereisadatabaseintheministriesregardingeducation,health,nutritionetc.- Digitalgreen-http://www.digitalgreen.org/worksinthecountry.

26

Anumberofparticipantssaidtheywouldliketobeinvolvedinthedashboarddevelopmentandoutlinedtheirareaofinterestandpreferredmethodofcommunication(Table5).

Table5Names,areaofinterestandpreferredcommunicationmethodforparticipantsinterestedinbeingengagedinthedashboarddevelopmentprocess.

Name Areaofinterest Preferredcommunicationmethod

RegassaTerefe CA/Agroforestry EmailTirunehG/giorgis Foodsecurity,creditfacilities,

marketinfrastructure,landhealth,livelihoods

Email,onlinetraining,skype

MergaDiyessa Spatialdataanalysis EmailGetachewMekuriya Integratedwatershed

managementEmail,onlinetraining

HadiaSeid Soilhealth,agroforestry,nutrition

Emailorskype

MesfinTsegaye Landhealth,soil EmailSofiyaKassa Soilhealth EmailAbateTaye Small-scalemechanisation EmailMiheretuFufa Agriculturalresearch EmailHussienUregesa Soilandwaterconservation PhoneMamushaLemma Gender,inclusiveness Email,skype,onlinetrainingWalterMupangwafromCIMMYT,SimretYassabufromILRI/NLAandAbedetaDebelafromMEFCCwerenotpresentfortheexercisebutindicatedaninterestinbeingengaged.

10. Trade-offAnalysisConstanceNeelyoutlinedthat:

• TheconceptofSAI,whichaimstoincreaseagriculturalproductioninanenvironmentallysustainableway,implicitlyinvolvestrade-offs.

• Understandingthesocial,economicandenvironmentaltrade-offsofSAIisinherentlycomplex,especiallyacrossdiverseagro-ecologicallandscapesandovertime

• Focusonspatiallyexplicitinterdisciplinarytrade-offassessments-incorporatespaceandtimeelementsaswellasinterdisciplinarydatasets,includinggenderpreferencesandequity,toconductsocio-ecologicaltrade-offanalysis.

ThetentativethemesandindicatorsfortheSAItrade-offanalysisweresharedwithparticipants,Figure4,andfeedbackwasrequested.

27

Figure6:TentativethemesandindicatorsforSAItrade-offanalysis.

Commentsonthesethemesandcriteria:- Underlandhealthaddvegetativecoveranddataonchemicals(agriculturalinputs)- Marketaspectshouldbeincludedunderproductivityorincome- Incomeshouldincludecashaswellasassets- Addathemeonwaterresourceswithindicatorsuchasgroundwatertable,water

contamination,riskoffloodordrought,landslides(extremeerosionevents)- Accesstocreditcouldcomeundersocialequity- Underfoodsecurityshouldaddnutrition

11. OptionsframeworkforscalingSAIParticipantswereaskedtoidentifyinterventionoptionstoaddressthebarrierstoscalingSAIandassociatedrootcauses.

Photo:Onegroupdiscussinginterventionoption.

28

TheinterventionoptionswerethenpresentedbyeachgroupasoutlinedinTable6.Table6:Interventionoptionstoaddressbarriersandrootcauses.

Barrierorrootcausebeingaddressed

Interventionoption

Whohastoworktogethertocarrythisout?

Whatwouldbetheindicatorthatthisoptionwassuccessful?

Whatinformationwouldbeneededtomonitorforsuccess?

Landdegradation SoilandwaterconservationCropdiversificationConservationAg

FarmersDevelopmentagentsandagriculturalofficers(government)ResearchersNGOsPrivatesector

NumberoffarmersusingthetechnologyProductionincreaseAreascoverageincrease

TrendanalysisYielddataNumberoftechnologyusers

Lackofaccesstoimprovedtechnologies

AvailingimprovedtechnologiesCreditfacilityAwarenesscreationandtraining

FarmerAgriculturalofficesResearchersMicro-financeNGOsPrivatesector

Numberoftechnologiesdeveloped/demonstratedNumberoffarmers(adopters)

TrendanalysisType/numberoftechniquespracticed

Knowledgeandskillgapofthefarmers

TrainingExperiencesharing

FarmersResearchersNGOsDAsAgriculutralofficers

NumberoftrainingsTypeoftrainingNumberofusersofthetechnique/skill

AssessmentthroughinterviewandquestionnairesChangeinskill(difficulttomeasure)

Knowledgegap/skillsforsmallholderfarmers(group2)

TrainingWorkshopVisitProvisionofguidelines

ExpertsinmandatedofficesModelfarmersDAsNGOsResearchandacademic

IncreaseinpracticeofSAI

NumberHHpracticingTypeofSAIpracticedIncreaseinproductivityandyieldChangeinrestoredarea

Economicproblemofsmallholderfarmers

ProvisionofcreditservicePaymentforecosystemservicesandpaymentstofarmers(PSNP–peoplepaidforamountworking)

FinancialenterprisesLocalgovernmentLocalNGOsInformalinstitutions

IncreaseinpracticeofSAIIncreaseinincome

Sameasaboveaswellas:LivelihooddiversificationChildrengoingtoschool

29

Lackofcoordination

InstitutionalisingthescalingupsystemFollowuponhowscalingupisgoingon

MandatedofficesHigherofficialsNGOsResearch/academiaPublicPlatformssuchastheSAIRLANLA

ProvisionofthetechnologywillbetimelyInformationflow

PracticeofSAISatisfactionofthegroupforhowsuccessfullyitwascoordinatedRealisingtheworkdone

Lackofcoordinationamongsectors(manysectorsworkingonsameissuebutdon'tknoweachother)

Platformandnetworkingneeded(couldbeestablishedbygovernmentorNGOS–NLAcouldplayarole)Degradationofduties(dashboardcouldassist)

GovernmentsectorsNGOsPrivateandpublicsectorsTargetbeneficiaries

NumberofparticipatingsectorsNumberofissuesraisedanddecisionmakingSatisfactionofbeneficiaries

MinutesfromthemeetingReportsoroutputs(researchetc.)FieldvisitobservationFeedbackfrombeneficiaries

Qualityandquantityoffarminputs

ValuechainPrivateserviceCreditfacilityIncentivesInfrastructure

FarmersandfarmercooperativeunitsMFIPrivateserviceprovidersGovernmentNGOs

MarginincreasebyfarmersIncreaseinproductivity(frominputs)Accesstoinputs,credit,infrastructure

ReportsandbeneficiaryfeedbackFieldvisitobservation(reports)

12. NextSteps,EvaluationandCloseDr.Mamushapresentedthenextstepsfortheproject:

• Trade-offanalysisintothedashboard• Byendofyear,firstformofthedashboard• DemonstrationsandinterventionsofcommunityprioritizedpracticesinZiway• Communicationsamongthoseinvolvedinthedashboarddevelopment

Heoutlinedthatfollowingtheworkshoptheorganizerswillsharethereporttoallwhohaveprovidedanemailaddresswithin2weeks.Dr.Mamushathenaskedeachparticipanttoexpresswhattheirnextstepwillbe,followingtheworkshop:• BriefmyinstitutionaboutSAIanddigmoreaboutotherexperiencesinSAIaswellaslink

morewiththeorganizers• ProvideaquickbriefforthestafftoworkonSAI• Sharingknowledgeobtainedwithcolleagues• IlearnttheneedfordepthplanningbeforeimplementationofSAIscalingup• SharingtheknowledgeonSAIwithresearchersandstartingSAIatourcenter• SharingtheknowledgethatIhavegainedthroughthisworkshop

30

• UsetheinformationIobtainedfromthisworkshopasaninputtoourprojects• Sharewillcolleaguestheideaofassessingbarriersandoptionsforsolvingbarriers• AdopttheSHAREDmethodology,especiallythedashboardstomyorganisationand

supportSAIinproducingadditionalspatialdata• Iwillsharethisinitiatewithmyorganisationandincorporateinmyprogramonpayments

forecosystemservices.CreateawarenessonSAIandshareideaswithothercolleagues/researchers

• ShareallinformationtotheAgNRMprograminmyorganisationandusealltheinformationforthenewprojectrelatedtoSAI

• IwillidentifythesuccesswemadeonSAIandsharetheobjectivesofICRAFprojectonSAIandtakeitasoneofthemainagendasbyourorganisation

WorkshopevaluationEachparticipantwasaskedtoshare,onacard,theirratingscorefrom1(lowest)to5(highest)foreachofthesecategories:

• Content• Objectives• Facilitation• TimeManagement• Representativesandparticipation• Logistics

TheoutcomeofthisevaluationareshowninFigure5.

Category Averagescore

Timemanagement

5

Facilitation 4.8Objectives 4.5Logistics 4.5Representation 4.2Content 4.1

Key:Onascaleof1-5:1=verypoor;2=poor;3=fair;4=goodand5=verygood. Overallscore 4.5or90%

Figure7:Workshopevaluationresults.

ClosingremarksFinally,closingremarksmadebyDrSofiaKassa(EIAR)werethattheICRAFledSAIRLAprojectwillcontributealotintermsofsustainableagricultureintensificationforthecountryandsmallholderfarmers.InthisnationalworkshopwelearntalotofinformationandknowledgeonSAI.Sheappreciatedactiveparticipationofstakeholdersandencouragedtheykeepworkingtogether.

012345Content

Objectives

Facilitation

Timemanagement

Representationandparticipation

Logistics

Workshopevaluationresults

31

Appendices

Appendix1ParticipantlistNo Name Gender Organization Email MobileNo.1 Regassa

TerefeM Oromiya

AgricultureResearchInstitute

regassaterefe@gmail.com 0913258163

2 HussienUregesa

M Adamitulu(Ziway)woredaAgricultureoffice

- 0910382783

3 WalterMupangwa

M CIMMYT w.mupangwa@cgiar.org 0929283971

4 MiheretuFufa M AdamituluAgricultureresearchcenter(OARI)

miheretufufa@gmail.com 0911530715

5 MergaDiyessa

M FarmAfrica merga2840@yahoo.com 0911716519

6 AbateTaye M InternationalDevelopmentEnterprise/IDE

ataye@ideglobal.org 0911053431

7 GetachewMekuriya

M AgricultureTransformationAgency/ATA

getme.miltoni@gmail.com 0912048741

8 TirunehG/giorgis

M CRS tiruneh.gebregiorgis@crs.org 0911938922

9 WubalemTadesse

M EthiopiaEnvironmentandforestresearchInstitute(EEFRI)

wubalem16@gmail.com 0912132303

10 MamushaLemma

M ILRI mamusha.lemma@gmail.com 0913060302

11 SimretYassabu

F ILRI-NLAfacilitator s.yassabu@cgiar.com 0911662511

12 AbedetaDebela

M MinistryofEnvironment,Forestandclimatechange/MEFCC

obsand@gmail.com 0915700200

13 WondossenG/Tsadik

M CEEFRC wondi27@gmail.com 0912845073

14 Yishaksoboka M Ministryofwaterirrigationandelectricity

yesboka@yahoo.com 0911955889

15 AbejeEshete M CEEFRCcentermanger

abejaye@gmail.com 0911762494

16 SofiyaKassa F EthiopianinstituteofAgricultureResearch/EIAR

Sofkassa28@gmail.com 0911987173

17 DiribaNigusse M CEEFRC d.debele@gmail.com 091116289918 RabeYahaya M CIMMYT r.yahaya@cgiar.org 096670160119 Mesfin

TsegayeM MEFCC mesfintsegaye@yahoo.com 0911956431

20 HadiaSeid F ICRAF Hadi03seid@yahoo.com 0913293250

32

Appendix2AgendaTime Day1 Responsiblepersons08.30-09.00 Registration MekdesSime09.00-10.30

o Openingo Introductions&objectives,Introductiontotheproject

andSAIRLAo GatheringperspectivesonSustainableAgricultural

Intensificationo IntroductiontotheSHAREDmethodology

Dr.WubalemTadesseDr.MamushaLemmaDr.ConstanceNeely

Tea/coffeeBreak Organizers11.00-12.00

o CurrentpolicydevelopmentandinvestmentdecisionmakingapproachforSAIinEthiopia

Dr.ConstanceNeelyDr.MamushaLemmaHadiaSeidMiekeBourne

12.00-13.00 o SAIscalingsuccessesinEthiopiao NationalprioritiesforSAIinterventions,scaling

mechanismsandindicators(reflectingoninputsfromZiway)

Facilitatorsandparticipants

Lunch Organizers14.00-15.15 o KeybarrierstoSAIscalingandtherootcausesofthese

barriersFacilitatorsandparticipants

Tea/coffeeBreak Organizers15.30-16.15 o PoliciesinsupportofscalingSAIandnationaland

internationaltargetsFacilitatorsandparticipants

16.15-16.45 o Presentationonthebaselineresultsforevidenceaccess,useandstakeholdernetworks

MiekeBourne

16.45-17.30 o Opportunitiestoenhanceaccesstoandownershipofevidencefordecisionmakers,aSAIdashboardforZiway

o Closeofday1

Facilitatorsandparticipants

Day2 09.00-09.15 o Recapday1 Facilitatorsand

participants09.15-10.00 o Trade-offanalysisthemesandindicatorsTea/coffeeBreak Organizers

10.30-12.00 o InterventionoptionstopromotescalingofSAI Facilitatorsandparticipants

12.00-12.30 o Nextstepsandclose TBDLunch

33

Appendix3BaselineresultsStakeholderCharacteristicsFigure1presentsbasiccharacteristicsofthe124SAIstakeholdersthatwereidentifiedandinterviewedineachofthethreeparticipatingcountries.Unfortunately,only19%arewomen.Inaddition,nearly60%of those interviewedareconsidered tohold significantdecision-makingpower, i.e. they (a)work forgovernmentinstitutionsandorganizationsthatsetSAIrelevantpolicyand/ordesignand/ormanageSAI-relevantprogrammes/projects/interventions;and(b)occupyseniordecision-makingandmanagementpositionsintheseorganizations.Finally,aboutone-thirdoftheSAIstakeholdershailfromeachofthethreeparticipatingcountries.

Figure2presents the typesoforganizations the interviewedSAI stakeholderswork for.Aswouldbeexpected,nearlyhalfarefromgovernmentinstitutions,while18%arefromNGOs.Ofparticularconcernisthatthereislessrepresentationfromtheprivatesectorandfarmersorganizations,somethingthatthecountryprojectteamswillworktorectifyinthecomingmonths.

Government48%

Privatesector7%

NGO18%

Academic5%

Farmer'sorganization

8%

Other14%

Figure2:TypesofOrganzationsofInterviewedStakeholder(N=124)

19%

81%58%

33% 36% 31%

Figure1:BasicCharateristicsofSAIStakeholdersInterviewed(N=124)

34

Figure4presentsfurtherdetailontheproject’sfirstprimaryoutcome,whichpertainstoasubsetoftheinterviewedstakeholdersthatholddecision-makingpositionsinorganizationsthatdesignandmanageSAI relevant policies, programmes, andinterventions. Unfortunately, only sevenof these stakeholders are women,revealing significant gender inequality inthe three participating countries,specifically in relation to leadershippositions in the agricultural sector.Nevertheless,sixoutofthesevenwomenscored positively on this indicator, ascompared to approximately half of theirmale counterparts. It is also noteworthythatabout two-thirdsof the interviewedEthiopiandecision-makers reportedbothhaving had accessed SAI evidence andincorporated this into policy and/orprogrammedecision-makingoverthelast12 months, as compared with less thanhalfamongtheircounterpartsinTanzaniaandZambia.Thedecision-makerswerealsoaskedhowspecificallytheirorganizationshadmadeuseofSAIrelatedinformationand/orevidence.Figure5summarizestheirresponses.Approximatelyone-thirdreportedthat their organizations had used such information/evidence to design specific agricultural policiesand/orstrategiesandspecificprogrammesandinterventions,respectively.Abouthalfalsoreportedthattheir organizations incorporated such information/evidence into the training or direct provision ofextension services to farmers. Far fewer, however, reported its integration into the design of newextensionmaterials.

WhileasignificantnumberoftheSAIdecision-makersreportedthattheirorganizationsincorporateSAIrelatedinformationintotheirdecision-making,farfewerdosowithrespecttomorenuancedevidencepertainingtowomenandmenandspecificsocialgroupsandcontexts.Consequently,thebaselinestatusfor this indicator isparticularly low, therebycallingontheproject teamto focussignificanteffortonameliorating this situation.However,Figure6doesshowthataboutone-quarterof thestakeholdersreported that their respective organizations incorporate evidence on the differential effects of SAI

33%

56%

47%53%

16%

7%

Designofgovernment/organizationalpolicyand/orstrategyonagriculture

Designofoneormorespecificprogrammesor

projects

Designofoneormorespecificinterventions

Inthetrainingofordirectextensiongiventofarmers

Designofextensionmaterialstobedeliveredtofarmers

Other

Figre5:HowInformation/EvidenceonSAIhasbeenused(N=43)

54%

86%

51%

69%

45% 43%

Overallbaselinestatus

Female Male Ethiopia Tanzania Zambia

(N=72) (N=7) (N=65) (N=29) (N=22) (N=21)

Figure4:PrimaryOutcomeIndicator1%oftargetedhigh-levelSAIdecisionmakersandinvestorsreportingthattheyhaveappraisedhighqualityevidenceonSAIpolicyandinterventioneffectivenessandusedittoinformrelevantSAI

decisionsinlast12m

35

interventionsoneitherwomenandmenonetheonehandordifferingcontextsandsocialgroupsontheother.However,whenbothareconsidered,thestatisticdropsto11%.AsispresentedinFigure7,theoverallstatusoftargetedstakeholdersaccessingexistingqualityevidenceonenablingpoliciesandeffectiveinterventionsforSAIthatbenefitwomen,poorersmallholders,andothersociallydifferentiatedgroupsisparticularlylow.ThisisbecausemostoftheintervieweesreportedthattheydidnothaveaccesstonuancedevidenceonthedifferentialeffectivenessofSAIinterventionsonbothwomenandmenanddifferingcontextsandsocialgroups.Overtwo-thirds,however,reportedhaving had access to general SAI evidence, with about one-third accessing differentiated evidenceparticulartowomenandmenontheonehandandspecificsocialgroupsintheother,butnotboth.

Figure8presentsdetailson the specific typesof SAI related informationandevidenceamong thosestakeholders who reported having had been able to access it in the last 12 months. Just over halfreportedhavinghadobtainedbasicbackground informationonSAI ingeneraland thatpertinent forparticularareasoftheirrespectivecountriesinparticular.Aboutone-thirdreportedhavinghadaccessedspecificevidenceontheeffectivenessofoneormoreSAIinterventions.

Figure9presents the specific sourcesof SAI related information andevidence accessed by thesestakeholders. Participation in trainingsessionsorworkshops are clearly themostpopular, followedby thereviewofcountryspecificresearchreports.

15%

67%

36% 31%17% 14%

24%11% 11%

Overallbaseline

status

SAIevidenceonly

Differentialeffects

onwom

en&men

Differentialeffects

onothersocial

groups

Decision-makers

Others

Ethiopia

Tanzania

Zambia

(N=124) (N=124) (N=124) (N=124) (N=72) (N=52) (N=41) (N=45) (N=38)

Figure7:IntermediaryOutcome1,Indicator1%oftargetedstakeholdersaccessingexistingqualityevidenceonenablingpoliciesandeffectiveinterventionsforSAIthatbenefitwomen,poorersmallholders,andother

sociallydifferentiatedgroups

55% 53%

36%

10%

Generalbackground

informationonSAI

InformationonspecificSAIpractices

relevantforspecificareasof

country

EvidenceontheeffectivenessofoneormorespecificSAIinterventions

Other

Figure8:TypesofInformationAccessedonSAI(N=83)

36

The ability of the targeted SAI stakeholders to not only access relevant SAI evidence but alsoappropriatelyappraiseitvalidityandutilityandmakeuseofitisshowninFigure10.ParticipationinaSAIworkshoportrainingsessionsandhavinghadaccesstoSAIinformationbelievedtobebothcredibleandrelevantisbeingusedasaproxymeasureforthisindicator.AsindicatedinFigure10,overall40%ofthe stakeholders surpassed the indicator’s threshold, with there being significant variation amongwomenandmenand the threeparticipatingcountries.Thedifferencebetweendecision-makersandnon-decision-makersismodestat5%.

15%

10%

10%

6%

23%

11%

43%

15%

3%

10%

5%

Countryspecificbrochure/pamphlet

Non-country specificbrochure/pamphlety

Countryspecificgeneral(non-research) report

Non-country specificgeneral(non-research) report

Countryspecificresearchreport

Othercountryspecificresearchreport

Trainingsessionorworkshop

Internetinformation

Onlinevideo

Televisionprogram

Other

Figure9:SAIInformation/EvidenceSources(N=83)

40%33%

41% 42% 37%51%

31% 37%

Overallbaseline

status Wom

en

Men

Decision-

makers

Nondecision-

maker

Ethiopia

Tanzania

Zambia

(N=124) (N=24) (N=100) (N=72) (N=52) (N=41) (N=45) (N=38)

Figure10:IntermediaryOutcome1,Indicator2IntermediaryOutcome1,Indicator2:%oftargetedstakeholderswithdemonstrableabilitytoaccess,appraise,anduseavailableevidenceonSAIrelevantpolicies,

mechanismsandinterventions

37

EthiopiaSAIStakeholdermaps

Key

Government

PrivateSector

NGO

Academic/Research

Donor

Figure1.EthiopianNationalSAIStakeholderNetworkbaseline,coloursrepresentorganisationtype

38

Key

Government

PrivateSector

NGO

Academic/Research

Donor

Figure2.EthiopiaNationalSAIStakeholderNetwork,showingactorswithmostconnectionsaslargercirclesTheNationalStakeholdernetworkcapturedasabaselineincludedalargenumberofresearchinstitutes,donors,NGOsandsomegovernmentdepartments.Forevidenceinformeddecisionmaking,theconnectionbetweenresearchersandimplementers/donorsisencouragingandcanbestrengthenedthroughthisproject.TheMinistryofAgriculture,NaturalResourcesdepartmentwasthemostimportantstakeholderlinkingthenetworkandintermsofthenumberofconnections.

39

Figure3.ZiwayDistrict(Woreda)SAIStakeholderNetworkbaseline,coloursrepresentorganisationtype

Key

Government

PrivateSector

NGO

Academic/Research

Farmerorganisation

CBO

40

Key

Government

PrivateSector

NGO

Academic/Research

Farmerorganisation

CBO

Figure4.ZiwayDistrictSAIStakeholderNetworkBaseline,showingactorswithmostconnectionsaslargercirclesInZiwayDistrict,mostofthecapturedstakeholdernetworkislooselyconnected,therearepartsofthenetworkwhicharedisconnectedhoweverandmanyopportunitiestoenhanceconnectivity.ThemostconnectedstakeholderswerethegovernmentagricultureandnaturalresourceofficesaswellasanNGOcalledRiftValleyChildrenandWomenDevelopmentOrganization.Thesestakeholderswillbeimportanttoenhanceinformationsharinginthenetwork.