Trans-SEC outline, research framework and activities


Published on

Published in: Technology, Economy & Finance
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Trans-SEC outline, research framework and activities

  1. 1. Trans-SEC outline, research framework and activities Frieder Graef (ZALF) Kick-off meeting 02/09/13 - 07/09/13 Morogoro
  2. 2. Overall approach of Trans-SEC •Screening, structuring and building of an inventory of Food Value Chains (FVC). •Two TZ regions and 4 case study sites representing a wide gradient between climate and socio-economic conditions. •Stakeholder involvement for demand driven approach, dissemination and capacity building; Ministry Of Agriculture, Food and Cooperatives plays a key role to connect findings to policy programs.
  3. 3. Overall approach of Trans-SEC •Most promising FVC upgrading strategies (UPS) (=success stories, good practices) will be identified, analysed and tested, impact assessments and cost-benefit analysis conducted, and results disseminated . •All research activities are embedded into a scenario and modeling framework, which allows assessing macro-/regional conditions, risk analysis and proofing for future conditions.
  4. 4. Trans-SEC partners Tanzania: - Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA, 4 dept.), - Two Agricultural Research Institutes of Tanzania (ARI), -Tanzania Federation of Cooperatives (TFC), -Agricultural Council of Tanzania (ACT), -National Network of Small-Scale Farmers’ Groups in Tanzania (MVIWATA), Germany: - Leibniz-Centre for Agric. Landscape Research (ZALF, 5 dept.) -University of Hohenheim (UHOH, 4 dept.) -Leibniz University Hannover (IUW) -Humboldt University Berlin (HU) -German Development Institute (DIE) -Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) -German Institute for Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture (DITSL) CGIAR: - IFPRI - International Food Policy Research Institute (USA) -ICRAF The International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (KE)
  5. 5. Food Value Chain (FVC) waste management, nutrient cycling Natural Resources Crop Production Processing Markets Consumption FVC UPS How to manage How to produce How to add resources value though crops more a better way? processing? efficiently ? e.g. e.g. e.g. watershed inter-cropping energy management, production, erosion prevention storage How to add value / income through markets? e.g. certification, outgrower schemes How to improve consumption patterns / diets? e.g. vitamin rich crops/food
  6. 6. Spatial design: 2 regions with 4 case study sites (CSS) 1. Region selection criteria : two different climates types: a. semi-arid Dodoma region (350-500) , b. semi-humid Morogoro region (600-750) (>1800) 2. CSS selection criteria within regions : a. rather similar climate, b. weak versus good market access (= market and capital access for investments), c. Rainfed agriculture oriented, not too strongly paddy rice oriented (<20% rice), d. Village size: approx. 800-1500 households
  7. 7. Spatial design: 2 regions, 4 CSS creates sufficiently diverse environmental and socio-economic conditions for a) investigating food securing upgrading strategies along FVC b) allowing for testing the transfer of our results to other Tanzanian regions scoping study by SUA for selecting the appropriate regions and CSS
  8. 8. Spatial design: 2 regions, 4 CSS
  9. 9. Food Value Chain approach •4 case study sites (CSS) in Dodoma and Morogoro region  •Typologizing the FVC and their components in the CSS () •Stakeholder mapping along the FVC () •Screening of UPS in the CSS, two focal regions (and beyond) () •Inventorying and participative prioritization of UPS
  10. 10. Food Value Chain approach •Identifying most promising UPS: only one for each FVC component per case study site (= feasible number of five UPS) and ex-ante scenario analysis without field testing •Testing/analyses of core UPS for all five FVC components:  UPS field trials at village/community level and on-station validation over a 3 years period  UPS in-depth analyses
  11. 11. Food Value Chain approach •Evaluation and (ex-post) impact assessment •Adaptation of UPS, requirement analyses •Lessons learnt for most promising UPS at local and regional level •Dissemination of results
  12. 12. Food Value Chain framework
  13. 13. Main research activities Focus groups and/or stakeholder workshops: a) Local workshops for 1-2 days. WS at CSS level with up to max. 30 stakeholders/inhabitants of the villages. b) Regional workshops for 1-2 days. WS with up to max. 40 stakeholders One big central HH survey, few specific HH surveys, and interviews:
  14. 14. Main research activities UPS field testing and in-depth analyses : UHOH, SUA and ARI Gender and/or socio-cultural issues, modeling, WebGIS development, assessment tools development, impact assessments, …
  15. 15. Upgrading strategies selection criteria •positive impact on food security •Knowledge of implementations •testing in the project life time •….. exclusion criteria •UPS beyond Trans-SEC expertise •Labour or cost intensive UPS •Irrigated crops (paddy) •… Revisit criteria with both scientists and stakeholders Trans-SEC partners preselect a set of ~5 feasible UPS / FVC component CSS stakeholders prioritise and identify 1 UPS per FVC component (Month 15)
  16. 16. UPS - selection process UPS will be selected for a)independent FVC components (2 CSS) b)entire FVCs (2 CSS, if stakeholders agree) Task 3.1 FVC + UPS inventorying Task 2.2 stakeholder involvement Process: transparent, systematic, and documented
  17. 17. Work Package structure WP4: Natural Resources WP5: Food Production Systems WP6: Post-harvest Processing, Biomass and Waste Product Utilization WP7: Commercialisation, Trade, Policies and Institutions WP8: Integration and Dissemination WP3: Food Value Chains and Risk Analysis WP 2: Participative Stakeholder System and Knowledge Transfer WP1: Scientific Coordination and Management
  18. 18. Work Package 1 (ZALF) German-Tanzanian Research Network, Project Co-ordination, Analytical Framework Task 1.1: Network, Management and Scientific Coordination (ZALF, SUA) Task 1.2: Risk control, supervision and mediation (ZALF, SUA) Task 1.3: Capacity building, knowledge transfer and sustainability (ZALF, SUA, ARI, TFC, MVIWATA and ACT)
  19. 19. Work Package 2 (ARI) Participative Stakeholder Systems and Knowledge Transfer Task 2.1: Identifying stakeholder groups, developing organisation plans for stakeholder involvement incl. defining roles and tasks of stakeholders (ARI, ZALF, ACT, TFC, MVIWATA, DITSL, supported by all) Task 2.2: Establishing stakeholder groups and conducting local and regional workshops (ARI, MVIWATA, TFC, ACT, SUA, DITSL, supported by all) Task 2.3: Preparing and conducting field and (few) on-station trials (ARI, UHOH, ACT, SUA, TFC, MVIWATA, DITSL, supported by all) Task 2.4: Aspects of gender and socio-cultural differences in food value chains (DITSL, SUA, ARI, DIE, TFC, ACT, MVIWATA)
  20. 20. Work Package 3 (IUW) Food Value Chains and Risk Analysis Task 3.1: Identifying, defining and typologizing FVC components and upgrading strategies to establish a comprehensive Tanzanian inventory (data base) (SUA, ARI, all) Task 3.2: Analyzing the current situation (baseline) by socio-economic, natural resource-oriented household surveys in the four case study sites: wave 1 (IUW, ARI, SUA, MAFC, IFPRI, ZALF, DIE, all) Task 3.3: Assessing and analyzing the impact of upgrading strategies within FVC by socio-economic household surveys: wave 2 (IUW, ARI, SUA, MAFC, IFPRI, ZALF, DIE, all)
  21. 21. Work Package 4 (UH) Natural Resources Task 4.1: Establishing a web-based Geo-Information-System (GIS) with a multiscale digital Food Security Atlas (FSA) of Tanzania; incl. water resource baseline study (UH, ARI, ZALF, PIK, SUA, ICRAF, IFPRI, IRA, (MAFC, TMA, SELIAN)) Task 4.2: Developing and applying tools to link-up crop, land evaluation, and water management to optimize planning of food security strategies (UH, SUA, ZALF, ARI, ICRAF, IFPRI, ILRI) Task 4.3: Modelling climate risks for regional production systems and FVC (Climate model LPJmL, IMPACT model) (PIK, IFPRI, IUW, SUA, ZALF) Task 4.4: Water availability and water demand: past and current water resources development and impact of land use change (ZALF, SUA)
  22. 22. Work Package 5 (UH) Food production Task 5.1: Analysing the current situation on biophysical conditions, and rainfed crop-, livestock- and agroforestry systems (baseline) (SUA, ARI, ICRAF, UHOH, TFC, ACT, MVIWATA) Task 5.2: Participatory on-farm/station testing, monitoring and assessing impacts of a) natural resource conservation technologies and b) crop production technologies (UHOH, ARI, SUA, ZALF, TFC, ACT, ICRAF, DITSL, MVIWATA) Task 5.3: Analysing and enhancing food quality and consumption practices; minimizing quality losses related to food processing (UHOH, IUW, SUA, TFC, ACT, MVIWATA, (MAFC)),
  23. 23. Work Package 6 (SUA) Post-harvest processing, biomass and waste product utilization Task 6.1: Analysing, testing and assessing impacts of improved regional and local post-harvest processes including biofuel/biogas options (Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)) (UH, SUA, ZALF, TFC, MVIWATA, ACT (MAFC)) Task 6.2: Analysing options on waste management and nutrient cycling to assess efficiency potentials in rural agricultural systems (SUA, UH, MVIWATA) Task 6.3 Assessing feasibility and developing income potentials of using complementary biomass production (ZALF, IUW, ICRAF, MVIWATA, TFC, ACT, DIE)
  24. 24. Work Package 7 (IFPRI) Commercialisation, trade, policies and institutions Task 7.1: Assessing commercialization pathways for smallholders to enhance market integration and information (including certification) (SUA, IUW, DIE, IFPRI, ARI, TFC, ACT, MVIWATA, ZALF) Task 7.2: Assessing national market and trade policies; scenarios of market expansion; and regional trader surveys to assess market chains (including international brokerage) (IFPRI, SUA, IUW, DIE, ARI, TFC, ACT, MVIWATA, ZALF(MITM, MAFC)) Task 7.3: Analysing supportive and inhibitive policies and related regional and national institutions to recommend reforms in FVC (DIE, IFPRI, SUA, HU, TFC, ACT, MVIWATA, (MAFC, MITM))
  25. 25. Work Package 8 (ZALF) Integration and dissemination Task 8.1 Synthesizing all conducted FVC assessments of upgrading strategies (expost and ex-ante impact assessment) and recommendations (ZALF, IFPRI, SUA, IUW, PIK, ARI, UH, DITSL, MVIWATA, TFC, ACT, supported by all WPs) Task 8.2: Synthesizing innovation feasibilities on the information flows and the network related to stakeholder activities for Tanzanian Trans-SEC partner organizations (HU, DIE, ARI, SUA, ZALF, MVIWATA, TFC, ACT; supported by all) Task 8.3: Disseminating Trans-SEC strategies, methods and results for public outreach at the level of science, policy, organizations and media (ZALF, MVIWATA, TFC, ACT, SUA, ARI, ZALF, DIE, MAFC, media, supported by all)
  26. 26. Types of research results 1)Deliverables • mainly reports • databases, tools • Website; WebGIS • conferences, workshops 1)Capacity building, exchange programme 2)Peer-reviewed publications in international Journals 3)Policy briefs, food policy recommendations
  27. 27. Trans-SEC core outcomes •sustainable multidisciplinary German-Tanzanian network for research, development and implementation (RDInet) , maintained beyond project lifetime •agronomic and food security risk atlas at multiple spatial and temporal scales integrating various FVC sectors; •tools for assessing potentials along the FVC to enhance regional food security; •multi-scale synthesis framework to identify and prioritize UPS for the food systems and to assess their feasibility and impact; •decision-support-system for UPS transfer and dissemination; •>4000 HH reached with successfully tested UPS
  28. 28. Thank you 07/11/13 28 Foote r
  29. 29. 07/11/13 Kick-off meeting 02/09/13 - 07/09/13 Morogoro 29
  30. 30. Upgrading strategies: selection criteria General •the expected positive impact on food and livelihood security; •knowledge and data availability of previous implementations Specific •feasibility of analysing/testing in the project life time; •rapid response to inputs; •social and cultural acceptability; •wide applicability and scale-up potential; •compatibility with other interventions; •long-term (>5 years) success; •good cost/benefits ratio; •demonstrated success in target regions; •environmental sustainability; •long-term resilience to climate change; •focus on preventing increase of social differences or conflicts
  31. 31. Trans-SEC FVC stakeholders 1 “Primary users” at grassroot level • Farmers (and pastoralists) • Processors, millers, stockiest • Traders, middlemen, transporters Mapping HH-survey, interviews, FGD, WS, testing UPS • Consumers 2 Interested organisations, institutions (key informants) •policy makers, extension officers, service providers •NGOs, churches, …
  32. 32. WP3: One central HH survey HH survey 200 HH UPS on farm testing >20-25 HH 5 HH selected, representative for extended UPS testing CSS 1+3 years on station testing
  33. 33. Tasks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 Rainy season Morogoro Rainy season Dodoma Task 1.1 Setting-up and assuring the network, management and scientific coordination within Trans-SEC analytical framework (M1.1) X consortium agreement (M1.1) X X kick-off / annual meeting (M1.1) Trans-SEC website design and concept (M1.2) X X X X X X website implimentation and launch (M1.2) X website revision (M1.2) Task 1.2 Risk control of deliveries, supervision of processes and mediation for intercultural understanding for all Trans-SEC tasks X risk control measures defined and revised (M1.3) X X X X X X X X X X supervison and optional conflict management (M1.3) X Task 1.3 Academic capacity building (CB), knowledge transfer and sustainability of the Trans-SEC consortium capacity building programme: exchange (M1.4) X capacity building programme: summer school (M1.5) continuation of GA-RDInet (M1.6) X Task 2.1 Identifying stakeholder groups, developing organisation plans for stakeholder involvement incl. defining roles and tasks of stakeholders stakeholder roles and tasks defined (M2.1) X Task 2.2 Establishing stakeholder groups, planning and conducting all local and regional workshops, focus groups, rapid appraisals for all other WPs framework for executing action research and upgrading strategies (M2.2) X X carrying out conceptual research workshops (M2.2) Stakeholder WS and focus groups (incl . imp. assessm.) on upgrading strategies (M2.2) Task 2.3 Operational preparing, setting-up and conducting on-farm trials in case study sites and (few) on-station trials for validation X X X X X on-farm / on-station trials set-up (M2.3) X X X X X X X X X X X on-farm / on-station trials and conducted (M2.3) X X X Task 2.4 Analysing and considering gender and socio-cultural differences Gender focus groups and role playing games carried out (M2.4) X X X X Task 3.1 Identifying, defining and typologizing FVC components and upgrading strategies to establish a comprehensive Tanzanian inventory (data base) X Local and regional FVC and their components identified (M3.1) X Priorization of upgrading strategies carried out with M2.2 (M3.1) Task 3.2 Analyzing the current situation (baseline) by socio-economic, natural resource-oriented household surveys in the four case study sites: wave 1 X Baseline household survey (wave 1) (M3.2) X Additional post-surveying if requested (M3.2) X Delivery of results to other WPs (M3.2) Task 3.3 Assessing and analyzing the impact of upgrading strategies within FVC by socio-economic household surveys: wave 2 Second wave of socio economic panel survey and impact assessment of upgrading strategies carried out (M3.3) X X Additional post-surveying if requested (M3.3) X Delivery of results to WP8 (M3.3) Task 4.1 Establishing a web-based Geo-Information-System (GIS) with a multi-scale digital Food Security Atlas (FSA) of Tanzania Mirrowed Web-GIS for Tanzania: conceptualisation (M4.1) Implementation (M4.1) X X