Partnerships West African Sahel and Dry Savannas
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Partnerships West African Sahel and Dry Savannas

on

  • 241 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
241
Views on SlideShare
241
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Partnerships West African Sahel and Dry Savannas Presentation Transcript

  • 1. DS partnerships WAS&DS
  • 2. a. Which partners did we successfully engage? How will we build on them (role in research, leadership, management, etc.)? • Partners = ? • Successful engagement = ? – RinD services (contract + invoice)? – RinD sub-grants (sub-PPA + financial report)? – RinD facilitation (ability to tactically influence / arbitrate DS research at action sites / years) – RinD guidance (ability to strategically guide DS research at a regional level and over the course of the program) Top-down CG-led ‘linear/cartesian’ Bottom-up Partner-led ‘iterative/stochastic’
  • 3. a. Which partners did we successfully engage? How will we build on them (role in research, leadership, management, etc.)? Partners Research Leadership Management NARS IER Mali, SARI Ghana, INRAN Niger Academia CDA Nigeria RROs Agrhymet NGOs AMEDD Mali FOs Private sector Policy MESSRS Burkina? Donors USAID, BMGF, McKnight
  • 4. b. Are we going to change our partnership setup (structure and budget)? • Structure: Yes. Budget: Yes. • Involvement through regional advisory committees • Increase minimum budget allocated to partners (at least 50% of CRP budget?) • Focus on quality rather than quantity of partners (fewer partners involved at a more strategic level) – should also be reflected in budget packaging • Non-CGIAR action site coordinators (caution: trans-boundary action sites) • More budgeting power in regional coordinators not only center focal points • Impact facilitator concept – nothing to do with research, role to facilitate partnerships for innovation platforms, producing outcomes and impact – in turn will relieve scientist from doing this (e.g. through ROPPA – noise makers that can attract attention of policy easier)
  • 5. c. Which main results are we expecting at regional level through partnerships? • Enhanced buy-in from partners • Partners effectively contribute to implementation of CRP • Improved ability to link into (regional) policy • Improved linkages to (governmental / national, regional) scaling-up / scaling-out mechanisms • Improved ability to target non-traditional donors (finance law) – example Adesina Nigeria • Access to pass-through funding through regional organizations (CORAF, ECOWAS)