Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
More meat, milk, and fish by and for the poor: CGIAR Research Program 3.7
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

More meat, milk, and fish by and for the poor: CGIAR Research Program 3.7

1,968

Published on

Presented by Tom Randolph to the 2nd Multi-stakeholder Platform Meeting Agenda for Action for Sustainable Livestock Sector Development, Phuket, Thailand, 2 December 2011 …

Presented by Tom Randolph to the 2nd Multi-stakeholder Platform Meeting Agenda for Action for Sustainable Livestock Sector Development, Phuket, Thailand, 2 December 2011

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,968
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. More meat, milk, and fish by and for the poor CGIAR Research Program 3.7 Presented to the 2 nd Multi-stakeholder Platform Meeting Agenda for Action for Sustainable Livestock Sector Development Phuket 2 December 2011
  • 2. CGIAR Change process
    • Perceived lack of impact
      • Lack of focus, inefficiencies
      • Lack of funding stability
    • New! CGIAR Consortium & Fund Council
    • CGIAR Research Programs
    • Transition ongoing
  • 3. Outline of Presentation
    • CGIAR Change process
    • Purpose of consultation
    • CRP3.7 Concept
    • Operationalizing CRP3.7
  • 4. CRP3.7 on Livestock & Fish
    • April-May 2010: Concept note
    • June-Sept 2010:
      • Proposal development
      • Stakeholder consultation
    • Feb-May 2011: Comments and revisions
    • July 2011: Fund Council approves with ‘ light adjustments ’
    • Official start: January 2012
  • 5. Purpose for this consultation
    • Stakeholders shaped CRP3.7 proposal
      • FARA meeting in July 2010
      • Stakeholder meeting in August 2010
      • E-consultation June 2010-June 2011
    • Continue spirit of consultation now CRP3.7 has been approved
    • How are we planning to implement CRP3.7?
    • How are we addressing environmental concerns
  • 6. Goal More meat, milk and fish by and for the poor To sustainably increase the productivity of small-scale livestock and fish systems to increase the availability and affordability of animal-source-foods for poor consumers and, in doing so, reduce poverty through greater participation by the poor along the whole value chains for animal-source foods.
  • 7. Goal More meat, milk and fish … for the poor To sustainably increase the productivity of small-scale livestock and fish systems to increase the availability and affordability of animal-source-foods for poor consumers and, in doing so, reduce poverty through greater participation by the poor along the whole value chains for animal-source foods.
  • 8. Goal More meat, milk and fish by … the poor To sustainably increase the productivity of small-scale livestock and fish systems to increase the availability and affordability of animal-source-foods for poor consumers and, in doing so, reduce poverty through greater participation by the poor along the whole value chains for animal-source foods .
  • 9. Basic Idea: Solution-driven R4D to achieve impact Past research has focused specific aspects of given value chains, commodities and country. ...in Country A ...in Country D ...in Country C ...in Country B Traditional approach was piecemeal Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers
  • 10. R4D integrated to transform selected value chains In targeted commodities and countries. Value chain development team + research partners We propose a focus on integrated value-chains for bigger impact . . . Approach: Solution-driven R4D to achieve impact Consumers
  • 11.
    • Strategic CRP 3.7 Cross-cutting Platforms
    • Technology Generation
    • Market Innovation
    • Targeting & Impact
    R4D integrated to transform selected value chains In targeted commodities and countries. Value chain development team + research partners GLOBAL RESEARCH PUBLIC GOODS INTERVENTIONS TO SCALE OUT REGIONALLY . . . combined with strategic cross-cutting platforms for scaling out. Major intervention with development partners Approach: Solution-driven R4D to achieve impact Consumers
  • 12. Getting to impact
    • Serving as Knowledge Partner in development interventions
    • Goal: catalyze large-scale intervention to transform target value chain
        • Smart design
        • Generate convincing evidence
        • Attract investment
  • 13. Delivering CRP3.7 Livestock + Fish Structure: Three integrated Components 1 Technology development: − Genetics − Feeds − Health Consumers Commodity X in Country Y 2 Value chain development 3 Targeting: Foresight, prioritization, gender, impact assessment Cross-cutting: M&E, communications, capacity building
  • 14. 9 Target Value Chains PIGS AQUACULTURE SHEEP & GOATS DAIRY
  • 15. 3-year Budget Envelope by Center TOTAL = US$99.6 million
  • 16. 3-year Budget Envelope by Component TOTAL = US$99.6 million
  • 17. Initial Work Plan: Technology Development
    • Animal health, genetics, feeds:
      • Assess constraints from pro-poor value chain lens
      • Identify best-bet interventions
    • Animal health
      • Continued work on key diseases: ECF, CBPP, PPR, African Swine fever
    • Livestock and fish genetics
      • Community-breeding schemes, fish improvement programs
    • Feeds
      • Improved food-feed crops, forages
  • 18. Initial Work Plan: Value chain development
      • Frameworks, tools for VC assessment
      • Link to CRP2 led by IFPRI
      • Partner engagement – R&D alliances
      • Site selection process
      • Rapid and in-depth VC assessment
      • Situational analysis
      • Testing & generating evidence for best-bet interventions
      • Action-research to get to solutions
      • Conventional trials to ensure credible
      • evidence
  • 19. Initial Work Plan: Targeting, gender, M&E
    • Targeting
      • GIS and trend analysis of target value chains regionally and nationally
    • Gender & equity
      • Tools and reviews
      • Priority interventions
    • M&E and impact assessment
      • Frameworks and indicators
  • 20. Environmental concerns
    • Growing value chains will have environmental implications
        • Expanded carbon footprint, more GHG
        • Stress on eco-services, degradation
        • Social: over-consumption of animal-source foods?
        • Good: improved productivity reduces GHG/unit product
  • 21. Actions to address environmental concerns
    • Articulate Environment strategy
    • (as addendum to proposal)
  • 22. Environment Component added NEW! Environmental impact assessment Structure: Three integrated Components 1 Technology development: − Genetics − Feeds − Health Consumers Commodity X in Country Y 2 Value chain development 3 Targeting: Foresight & prioritization, gender, impact assessment Cross-cutting: M&E, communications, capacity building
  • 23. Actions to address environmental concerns
    • Articulate Environment strategy
    • Add Environment Component to structure
      • Trade-off analysis for water, land and biomass use
    • Appropriately adapted Life Cycle Analysis for value chain (ex. WF study)
    • Environmental monitoring plan
    • Evaluate implications of proposed technologies and value chain interventions
  • 24. Relevance for the Agenda of Action
    • Closing the efficiency gap
      •  improving productivity in small-scale systems
    • Grasslands ??
    • Reduced discharge – manure management
      •  easier to manage in small-scale systems as integrated crop-livestock production or with manure as a marketable by-product
  • 25. CRP 4
  • 26. Discussion Points
    • Does our approach on environmental issues adequately address your thematic areas?
    • Are we missing other key environmental concerns?
    • What lessons can you offer on how research can better work with development partners to stimulate pro-poor value chain development?
    • Obviously the private sector is key to sustainability of our target value chains. What have we learned about research successfully engaging the private sector? Examples?
  • 27. More meat, milk and fish by and for the poor We wish to thank FAO for allowing this opportunity to consult with our core stakeholders

×