Annual Performance Review and                             South-South Cooperation Event                            1-6 Nov...
Table of ContentsACRONYMS ...................................................................................................
ACRONYMSACIAR      Australian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchAIT        Asian Institute of TechnologyAPMAS ...
FOREWORDA cornerstone of the annual portfolio review exercise is the Annual Performance Review (APR)workshop that takes pl...
SETTING THE STAGEOpening the dialogueOn the evening of 31 October, the 2010 Annual Performance Review (APR) workshopwas ki...
•   5 representatives of the host country   •   82 project colleagues (including four knowledge facilitators) from 15 coun...
six years, against an average duration of close to nine years for its more matureprojects.The PSR scores demonstrated the ...
linked to grant portfolio management. Other challenges include no corporate minimumrequirements for grants’ supervision (f...
Since 2006 when IFAD started supporting the programme, the Learning Routes haveproved to work as an effective learning mec...
From “Learning Routes” to “Learning Highways”The Innovation Marketplace during the workshop was the beginning of adopting ...
MONITORING AND EVALUATIONA total 40 people representing Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Laos, Maldives,Mongolia, Pakis...
Part I: Improving financial managementThe presentation and the discussion revolved around five main areas:AWPB credibility...
replicated in another country. It can also mean designing a second phase of the projectthat includes high profile investor...
Scaling up with cautionThese and other tips on scaling up seemed to encourage the participants. But cautionarytales were a...
•   Value chain development needs public-private-partnership – government and    private sector to go hand in hand.•   The...
•   find advantages of buying products directly from the Maldives for the resorts    buyers•   bring project design limita...
•   The approach is also very open as it allows plans to be revised in accordance with    villagers’ needs.•   Demand-driv...
Dry Zone Livelihood Support and Partnership Programme of Sri Lanka and suggestedthat future project designs should:•   ide...
presentation of a case study by ICIMOD on community perceptions on climate change,the impacts and resultant responses from...
SHARING BEST PRACTICES IN KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTIFAD country programmes are taking strides in Knowledge Management (KM). Dur...
BUILDING CAPACITY TO SHARE KNOWLEDGEThe session led by Mr Yolando Arban aimed to share and discuss experiences in building...
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) on Knowledge Sharing Skills (KSS). The projectcovers training in writing skills, system...
Improved communication and coordination that better integrates KM and institutionalworking arrangements has the potential ...
project staff in different countries. The first regional network analysis was conducted in2009. The mapping exercise helps...
Other insights on the topic were provided:•   Not all people or public is good and the private sector not formally bad. Di...
•   dealing with cassava pests and disease•   innovation to improve the EDE continuum•   strengthening coordination among ...
ANNEX 1: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTSCHINA HOST COUNTRY                                              Mr. Li ZhengxuanMr. Li Xinha...
Mr. Zhao Yuping                             Mr. Qiu YonghongDirector                                    Vice-DirectorInner...
OTHER PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES                   BHUTANBANGLADESH                                      Mr Sangay           ...
Mr. Duong Kim Chhean                           Ms. Rupa MistryMonitoring and Evaluation Specialist           ManagerRural ...
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Highlights and Outcomes
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Highlights and Outcomes


Published on

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Highlights and Outcomes"

  1. 1. Annual Performance Review and South-South Cooperation Event 1-6 November 2010, Nanning China Highlights and Outcomes Compiled by: Martina Spisiakova, Asia and the Pacific Divisionbased on contributions to the IFAD social reporting blog, statements and presentations
  2. 2. Table of ContentsACRONYMS ............................................................................................................. IIFOREWORD ............................................................................................................ IIISETTING THE STAGE .................................................................................................. 1REFLECTING ON ACHIEVEMENTS IN 2009-10..................................................................... 2LEARNING HIGHWAYS ................................................................................................. 4MONITORING AND EVALUATION...................................................................................... 7IMPROVING FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT .............................................................................. 7BEST PRACTICES IN DIRECT SUPERVISION AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT .................................. 9SCALING UP ............................................................................................................ 9VALUE CHAINS ....................................................................................................... 11COMMUNITY-BASED DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................... 13RISK AND VULNERABILITY .......................................................................................... 14INTEGRATING RURAL DEVELOPMENT, CLIMATE CHANGE AND SUSTAINABLE NATURAL RESOURCEMANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................ 15SHARING BEST PRACTICES IN KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT .................................................... 17BUILDING CAPACITY TO SHARE KNOWLEDGE .................................................................... 18RESEARCH AND LIVELIHOODS...................................................................................... 19ICTS FOR LIVELIHOODS ............................................................................................ 20SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS....................................................................................... 20PUBLIC-PRIVATE-PEOPLE PARTNERSHIP .......................................................................... 21OPEN SPACE ......................................................................................................... 22FIELD TRIP ........................................................................................................... 23ANNEX 1: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS ............................................................................ 23ANNEX 1: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS ............................................................................ 24ANNEX 2: 2010 APR PROGRAMME ............................................................................... 36ANNEX 3: INNOVATION MARKETPLACE ........................................................................... 40ANNEX 4: INNOVATION CHAMPIONS .............................................................................. 41ANNEX 5: GROUP PHOTO .......................................................................................... 42ANNEX 6: EXAMPLES OF KEY LEARNING OF PROJECTS ......................................................... 43 i
  3. 3. ACRONYMSACIAR Australian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchAIT Asian Institute of TechnologyAPMAS Asian Project Management Support ProgrammeAPR Annual Performance ReviewAWPB Annual Work Plan and BudgetBARC Bangladesh Agriculture Research CouncilCIAT International Centre for Tropical AgricultureCIGs Common interest groupsCGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural ResearchCOSOP Country Strategic Opportunities ProgrammeCPM Country Programme ManagerCPO Country Programme OfficerHBs Household businessesICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain DevelopmentICTs Information and Communication TechnologiesIDRC International Development Research CentreLGED Local Government Engineering DepartmentECD Environment and Climate DivisionENRAP Knowledge Networking for Rural Development in Asia PacificFAO Food and Agriculture OrganizationFADIP Fisheries and Agriculture Diversification ProjectKFs Knowledge FacilitatorsKLM Knowledge and Learning MarketKSS Knowledge Sharing SkillsM&E Monitoring and EvaluationKM Knowledge managementMORDI Programme for Mainstreaming of Rural Development InnovationsNEDA National Economic Development AuthorityNRM Natural resource managementPD Project/Programme DirectorPIM Project Implementation ManualPMU Project Management UnitPPPP Public-private-people partnershipPROCASUR Regional Programme for Rural Development TrainingPSR Project Status ReportQA Quality AssuranceRIMS Results Information Monitoring SystemRuMEPP Rural Micro Enterprise Promotion ProgrammeSNA Social Network AnalysisUN United NationsUNIDO United Nations Industrial Development OrganizationUNOPS United Nations Office for Project ServicesWA Withdrawal application ii
  4. 4. FOREWORDA cornerstone of the annual portfolio review exercise is the Annual Performance Review (APR)workshop that takes place every 18 months in the Asia and the Pacific Region. This importantknowledge-sharing event is an opportunity to engage project directors, regional partners,private organizations and IFAD staff in conversations oriented towards the improvedperformance of IFAD-supported projects and programmes in the Asia and Pacific region. Itenables participants to converge and review their performance, address their challenges,seek solutions from peers, and present best practices in project implementation and variousdevelopment areas.The 2010 APR, organized in collaboration with the Government of China, was held inNanning, China, during 1-4 November 2010. A total of 180 participants (see Annex 1)attended the event, representing all ongoing IFAD-supported projects and programmes in theregion. Participants that included representatives from governments, country and regionaldevelopment partners, private sector organizations, and IFAD staff actively contributed to theworkshop process, content and outcomes.In recent years, the APR workshops have evolved from an IFAD-centric focus on internalprocesses and procedures to more country- and participant-centered learning processes.Through five simultaneous sessions going on at the same time and a range of interactiveformats such as mini-workshops, chat shows, peer assists, fish bowl and speed sharingrounds, the Division put a lot of effort to promote knowledge-sharing among participants andlearning from each other’s experiences and know-how.The objectives of the 2010 APR workshop were to:• Review 2009-2010 achievements and reflect on project performance.• Learn from each other experiences – both successes and challenges – through the exchange of best practices and peer supported mechanisms• Develop capacity on key issues of implementation and thematic areas through hands-on mini-workshops and chat show formats• Familiarise Project Staff, Country Programme Managers (CPMs) and Country Presence Officers (CPOs) with the “Learning Highways in Asia” initiative and showcase selected innovations.The event was also an opportunity to:• convene and further develop country activity planning in areas such as monitoring and evaluation (M&E), Results and Impact Monitoring System (RIMS), and knowledge management (KM)• provide feedback on the “Learning Highways in Asia” proposal• participate in the field trip to the West Guangxi Poverty Alleviation Project and a south- south cooperation event organized by the Government of ChinaThis event was expected to influence the following set of outcomes:• Stronger teams and relationships with peers, colleagues, country and regional partners, as well as with China colleagues, as a basis for networking to continue sharing good practices, knowledge and experience.• Deeper understandings of implementation issues and thematic areas.• Good practices in implementation and thematic areas have been identified and documented for replication and scaling-up.• Future regional collaboration and strengthened south-south relations.Like last year in Bangkok, Knowledge Facilitators (KFs) played a crucial role in facilitating anddocumenting the event using a range of facilitation and interactive techniques.Documentation was provided through social reporting, a process whereby workshophighlights, presentations, interviews, videos and photos were posted on a blog created on theIFAD website:, which we kindly invite you tovisit! iii
  5. 5. SETTING THE STAGEOpening the dialogueOn the evening of 31 October, the 2010 Annual Performance Review (APR) workshopwas kicked off with inspirational messages and high spirits. Participants gathered inGuoyan Hall of Guangxi Wharton International Hotel, to hear the opening remarks fromMr. Li Xinhai, Counselor, Chinese Mission to IFAD and Mr Thomas Elhaut, Director, Asiaand the Pacific Division, IFAD. A welcoming reception followed the speeches to providean exciting opportunity for the participants to socialize over food and drinks.Mr Thomas Elhaut welcomed participants and told them: “The event has moved from aportfolio performance workshop to a knowledge-sharing event. Our annual event hasbecome your event. You have taken charge, and we are happy facilitators.” In hisopening remarks, Mr. Li Xinhai highlighted that since joining IFAD in 1980, a fondcollaboration has been maintained between the Government of China and IFAD inpromoting rural poverty reduction and sustainable socio-economic development. This hasenhanced the poverty reduction efforts of China, allowed the country to acquireinternational experiences, advanced poverty reduction approaches, and managementpractices, thus contributing positively to the rural development and poverty reductionagenda of China. Mr Li stressed that by November 2010, IFAD has provided China with aloan amount of US$ 590 million in 23 projects. The projects covered 22 provinces andfocused on areas such as integrated rural development, eco-environment improvement,agricultural extension and training, rural financial service and women development.Several dozen millions of poor rural people have benefited from this assistance.Meanwhile, China has also been exploring the multilateral platform of its partnershipwith IFAD, to promote knowledge sharing with other developing countries through, forexample, South-South Collaboration events.Goal and objectivesHeld during 1-4 November in Nanning, China, the overall goal of the 2010 APR workshopwas to enhance learning and knowledge sharing in various implementation and thematicareas, through conversations oriented towards the improved performance of IFAD-supported projects and programmes in the Asia and Pacific region. The workshop wasplanned with the following objectives in mind: • Review 2009-2010 achievements and reflect on project performance during this period. • Learn from each other experiences – both successes and challenges – through the exchange of best practices and peer supported mechanisms • Develop capacity on key issues of implementation and thematic areas through hands-on mini-workshops and chat show formats • Familiarise Project Staff, Country Programme Managers (CPMs) and Country Presence Officers (CPOs) with the “Learning Highways in Asia” initiative and showcase selected innovations.The event was also an opportunity for (1) Country Programme Managers (CPMs),Country Presence Officers (CPOs), and projects to convene and further develop countryactivity planning (e.g. M&E, RIMS and KM; and, (2) soliciting feedback on the “LearningHighways in Asia” proposal.ParticipantsThis year, the workshop was actively attended by 180 colleagues from the extendedIFAD family engaged in poverty reduction work in Asia and the Pacific, with the followingbreakdown: 1
  6. 6. • 5 representatives of the host country • 82 project colleagues (including four knowledge facilitators) from 15 countries • 19 people from 7 regional partner organizations • 3 people from private partner organizations • 9 participants from other regions; and • 44 IFAD staff and consultants (including workshop facilitators). • 15 local support staff • 3 translatorsPromoting learning and knowledge sharingThe APR workshops have evolved from an IFAD-centric focus on internal processes andprocedures to more country- and participant-centered learning processes. The role ofKFs expanded, the range of knowledge management (KM) techniques used during theworkshop improved and all participants engaged and contributed in one way or another.The main workshop facilitators – Ms. Lucie Lamoureux and Mr Edgar Tan worked withthe KFs before the event, including a 1.5-day meeting before the APR, to prepare themfor various techniques and to ensure a smooth flow of the event. The KF group alsodocumented the proceedings through a blog. Please visit this blog for more detaileddocumentation and information: ON ACHIEVEMENTS IN 2009-10In an opening presentation by Ms. Maria Donnat, IFAD, participants had a chance toreflect on the performance of their projects, countries and the region as a whole in 2009-10. In the regional context of low economic growth, high food prices, continuing declinein the share of agriculture in GDP and the worsening of the security situation inAfghanistan and Pakistan, the period under review has seen marked performanceimprovements in a number of important areas as far as the Asia and the Pacific Region,and its portfolio of loan and grant-funded projects, are concerned.Maria stressed that the Division recorded historic disbursement levels, reaching someUS$ 177 million compared to disbursement level of US$100 million during the previousreview period. The Division mobilized co-financing of US$ 249 million. For each dollarinvested in new projects, it leveraged US$ 1.16 from co-financing partners. Between July2009 and June 2010, nine projects and one COSOP were approved, worth US$ 213million. Our loans and DSF grants portfolio is now reaching 62 projects and will reachsome 70 project next year. However, keeping our portfolio at a manageable size is ourmain current challenge. She presented two possibilities for containing portfolio growth: (1) Reducing the average project duration and closing project on time (2) Increasing the average loan size in countries where the PBAS allocation allows this to happenDuring the review period, we have already successfully reduced the average projectduration, which used to be around nine years and is now around six years. During lastreview period, we have managed to increase the average loan size from 24.44 million in2007/07 to 26.9 million. However, during current review period, average loan size hasreduced to 23.67 million, with the explanation that there have not been any newprojects approved over the review period for our two largest PBAS countries: China andIndia.The QA scores of the nine projects approved since 30 June 2009 have improved,although they can improve even more. The average lag between approval andeffectiveness (under the previous “rule”) has further reduced to 9.7 months. In order tomaintain the size of its portfolio, in terms of number of active projects, to a manageablelevel, the Division has successfully reduced the average duration of its new projects to 2
  7. 7. six years, against an average duration of close to nine years for its more matureprojects.The PSR scores demonstrated the same problem areas like last year – disbursement,M&E, exit strategy, financial management, AWPB, gender, institution building, projectmanagement, audit, innovation and learning and service providers. For example, M&Eissues continue to deprive Project Directors from the ability to steer implementation andstakeholders from understanding real project performance and impact. M&E has beenunsatisfactory for 19 projects with the tendency for new projects receiving higher scores.However, some improvement has been achieved compared to the last review period indisbursement, project and financial management, institution building, audit, innovationand learning and service providers. As far as exit strategies, AWPB and gendermainstreaming are concerned, however, there was a deterioration in performance thisyear.The Division has successfully taken up the challenge of direct supervision. Maria pointedout a steep learning curve from 2007 to date. In 2007/08, there was a shift of directsupervision from UNOPS to IFAD. The challenge was to get familiar with core supervisionrequirements and processes and key project issues. 2008/09 – 2009/10 was marked byfine tuning of direct supervision process, focusing on key areas such as financialmanagement and M&E, getting client feedback which generated opportunities forlearning and sharing for accelerated improvement. In 2010, the Division aimed to ensurethe highest quality standards across countries and projects through improvedsupervision processes, Aide Mémoires and expertise, and to enhance the impact ofsupervision process on projects’ effectiveness and performance. Through regularmonitoring of the quality and efficiency of its supervision missions during Peer Reviewmeetings, the Division strives to ensure that these missions are effective in highlightingall implementation challenges and issues, while an increasing number of implementationsupport missions are being organized. Nevertheless, there is room for improvementespecially in terms of ensuring clarity and usefulness of recommendations, reporting onresults (lack of impact data), covering areas such as sustainability, targeting andknowledge management, expressing mission’s opinion, covering detailed fiduciaryaspects and attaching audit logs.During the review period, 382 withdrawal applications (WAs) were processedrepresenting 20 per cent of all WAs processed in IFAD and 36 per cent of total IFADdisbursements. However, the time IFAD takes to process WAs from the day the papercopy is received in the mail room to the day the Treasury gives payment instructions,needs to be reduced. The current average Division’s processing time is 27.46 days (PMDaverage: 27.06 days). This high processing time is mainly explained by the fact that theRegional Finance Manager has to take mandatory contract breaks and has no assistant.The improvement in most PSR indicators is a testimony of the fact that the Division’sefforts to provide more adequate implementation support, away from a purely“supervision” mode, are finally bearing fruits – even if there is still room forimprovement in a number of areas. The reduction in the number of problem projects(from 15 to 12) and the fact that most new projects have started well, only providesfurther evidence of this; so does the much improved APR Pro-Activity Index.In terms of results achieved, Maria pointed out that the grants’ portfolio is generatingvery interesting knowledge and lessons learned which are now more systematicallycaptured and disseminated. Many grants have produced a range of knowledge products.They have also successfully piloted a number of interesting innovations which are beingscaled up within IFAD loan-funded investments, or by others, much more frequently thanin the past. Much has also been achieved during the review period in terms of KMprocesses, infrastructure and culture. However, some challenges remain. Our 68 grantsonly represent a total value of US$ 40.9 million highlighting the high transaction costs 3
  8. 8. linked to grant portfolio management. Other challenges include no corporate minimumrequirements for grants’ supervision (frequency, quality norms), no budget for grants’supervision and the fact that only 30 per cent of large regional grants supervised.Within the loan/DSF- funded projects, overall implementation has significantly improvedover the past twelve months. Although there is still room for improvement, project-levelM&E systems are increasingly generating reliable information and APR is probably theDivision which has been the more diligent in conducting RIMS Surveys. When projectsare organizing additional outcome and impact surveys, findings are usually showing thatIFAD has had, or is having, a positive and measurable impact on farmers’ incomes, foodsecurity, agricultural production and productivity.Within this overall very positive picture, the Division remains confronted with new, orlong-lasting, challenges. Hence IFAD investments in the Asia and Pacific Region areexpected to expand in many new countries over the new PBAS cycle (2010-2012).Coupled with the sharp increase in the amount of resources available for lending,maintaining the size of its portfolio at a manageable level will represent a majorchallenge for the Division in the years to come. The Division also needs to be much moredisciplined when it comes to loans and grants’ closing.The quality of project-level procurement and financial management processes, and thequality of project audit reports, remain problematic in a number of projects in manycountries, highlighting the need for the Division to organize more systematically targetedimplementation support missions. For example, financial management continues to beproblematic for 17 projects (31 per cent of portfolio). A high proportion of projects havefinancial management problems in four additional countries. This can have adverseconsequences on the portfolio in terms of implementation standstill. Also, and despitethe record disbursement level recorded by the Division as a whole, some projects andcountries still record unacceptably high disbursement lags.Regarding staff of country presence offices, their diversity and number have increasedduring the review period. Nevertheless, there was no progress as far as theregularization of Country Presence Officers is concerned as none of them received anIFAD contract during the period under review.In terms of development results, the bulk of project resources are still allocated tomicrofinance, followed by agricultural development and natural resources management(NRM) the latter two objectives having seen, overtime, a reduction in budgetallocations). Worthwhile noting, allocations to SO3 (Improved access to markets) haveincreased overtime, reflecting a shift from support to physical market infrastructure (e.groads and market places) of earlier projects to softer interventions such as groupdevelopment support, value chain development, linkages between producers andtraders, etc.)Read more about this session:Annual Performance Review 2009-2010: HIGHWAYS‘Rutas de Aprendizaje’ or ‘Learning Routes’ is an interesting example of South-Southcollaboration supported by IFAD. It is currently being implemented by the RegionalProgramme for Rural Development Training (PROCASUR) – a Latin American trainingorganization specialized in building capacities for rural development. Mr Ariel Halpernfrom PROCASUR familiarized participants with this “Knowledge Management andCapacity Building Tool for Global South”. 4
  9. 9. Since 2006 when IFAD started supporting the programme, the Learning Routes haveproved to work as an effective learning mechanism for development workers andbeneficiaries – both men and women – from different social, economic and culturalenvironments by bringing together a multidisciplinary group of rural developmentworkers and partners from different regions for a series of thematic visits tocommunities that have faced development challenges.Through the programme, PROCASUR promotes the recovery and systematization ofavailable knowledge, its pedagogical organization, and the exchange and application ofnew approaches, good practices and lessons learned. By doing so, it aims to multiply thetransfer and dissemination of knowledge and develop rural organizations, technicalteams of rural development projects, their national executing institutions in localgovernments and private organizations.PROCASUR’s milestones are the development of technical capacity linked to the field,decentralization in order to have lower and fixed costs, a demand-driven approach and‘inter-generational’ dialogue. The idea is to unify the best talents in order to help thepoorest and the most disadvantaged rural people.Since the beginning of the programme, PROCASUR and its partners have implementedover 45 Learning Routes to innovative activities in 15 countries from Latin America,Africa and Asia. This has strengthened the capacities of more than 650 directparticipants from 35 different countries; more than 4,000 people from rural areas havebenefited from the knowledge acquired during the routes. PROCASUR is looking to scaleup the initiative, and especially to explore new areas of intervention and influence.The programme includes and values the best experiences and knowledge of institutions,associations, communities and rural families. Each route is organized thematicallyaround experiences, case studies and best practices on innovative rural and localdevelopment in which local actors become trainers.Through workshops and interviews in the field, participants learn about the struggles andsuccesses of small entrepreneurs when trying to start their businesses and the ways tomake them successful. This approach is enriching both to the visitors – mainlydevelopment professionals of various disciplines, community leaders and policymakers –and their hosts, and provides opportunities for discussion and collective analysis.The routes, apart from transferring knowledge, give visitors a new vision for theircountry, teaches them how not to repeat errors and helps them find solutions to developtheir countries’ institutions. The routes are based on the following pillars, they:• recognize that in rural areas it is possible to find successful solutions to common problems to be adapted and multiplied in other contexts• enable participants to acquire direct knowledge and arouse curiosity and interest for continuous learning• strengthen the skills of local trainers and technical assistance – champions become experts• provide opportunities for direct dialogue in the field and collective analysis.It has been highlighted that during the routes simple teaching demonstrations can beextremely fast, but are useless if observers are not able to absorb and internalize thewhat they have learned and acquired, and to teach and explain this to others when theyare back in their countries. Indeed receivers’ countries, when asking for technical andfinancial support, aim to apply the future lessons learned in their single country, whichoften has different characteristics from the one where the route has been organized. 5
  10. 10. From “Learning Routes” to “Learning Highways”The Innovation Marketplace during the workshop was the beginning of adopting themethodology as “Learning Highways through Asia” initiative. It enabled the Asia and thePacific Division to undertake ‘innovation mapping’ and identify institutions and innovationchampions that can facilitate Learning Routes in Asia in the future. The Asia and thePacific Division, in collaboration with PROCASUR, sent a ‘Call for proposals on ruralinnovations from projects’ to all workshop participants (see Annex 3). The idea was toidentify innovations from IFAD-supported projects in all development areas, such assustainable natural resource management, increased productivity, rural businesses andaccess to markets, financial inclusion of the rural poor, policy dialogue with public andprivate sectors, working with local governments, women, youth and different ethnicgroups. Ariel Halpern reviewed all proposals received from projects and identified thefirst round of innovation champions (see Annex 4). These included projects from the Asiaand the Pacific Region, as well as from East and West Africa, and South and CentralAmerica.After the innovation champions were introduced on the stage, participants were invitedto visit their stands and “shop” for ideas (see also Annex 5). When they came back toplenary, they were invited to share their insights on what they found interesting, whatinnovations they felt were missing this year and whether they would be interested tofollow up with the innovators. The participants who were interested in some innovationswere then invited to join the “Knowledge Business Tables” to “close the deal” and learnfrom others. Knowledge Business Tables is an interactive face-to-face and peer-to-peermethodology that enables participants to identify challenges and best practices andharvest demand for various innovations. The map below shows the following (i) greenflag – places that offer knowledge; (ii) red – places that have challenges; (iii) blue andyellow –possible learning routes.The outcomes of the Knowledge Business Tables are the basis for a concept note for agrant programme in 2011.Read more about this session:• Innovation Marketplace: learning-routesinnovation-marketplace-ariel-halpern• Knowledge Business Tables: learning-routesknowledge-business-tablesariel-halpern• Learning Highways:• Rafting on Cahabón River: learningrouteschinasseventraftingonthecahabnriver 6
  11. 11. MONITORING AND EVALUATIONA total 40 people representing Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Laos, Maldives,Mongolia, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines and Viet Nam participated in the session on‘Monitoring and Evaluation for All’ facilitated by Maria Donnat. Maria presented thefollowing topics in her presentation:• An overview of M&E• Challenges which projects face in M&E• Summary of the M&E journey• Moving from a focus on Monitoring to a focus on Evaluation• Evaluation challenges• Quality verses Quantity• Monitoring ChallengesMost discussion referred to the following issues:• Does RIMS offer indicators which can analyse data on the quality of the outcome of the project?• Should the baseline actually be done during the design of the project?• In a very complex project with several components and several objectives, how can indicators be identified while conducting the baseline survey in order to achieve a qualitative outcome?• The same indicators cannot be used to measure output, outcome or social and economical impact, therefore does this mean that there should be different indicators in each level?The participants found the session very helpful, especially as they were able tohighlight their problems and issues, and techniques used to overcome challenges. Mr.Jose Roi Avena, M&E Specialist for Rural Micro Enterprise Promotion Programme in thePhilippines, shared: “The session helped me in a way that it added to my confidencethat difficulties may abound in terms of M&E for projects. But the confidence is to seethat I am not alone when it comes to these projects. There are other people that Icould depend on or maybe ask their help, to be able to help me surmount thesedifficulties.”Read more about this session:• M&E:• M&E Technical Guidelines: 2010metg3-focus-group-discussions• M&E Key Informant Interviews: 2010-metg4-key-informant-interviews• Participatory M&E: 6193484• Integrating M&E in project implementation – experience from Pakistan: implementationpakistanakarimIMPROVING FINANCIAL MANAGEMENTFourteen participants attended this mini-workshop session led by Mr Shankar Kutty,IFAD. The mini-workshop was divided into two parts:• improving financial management• coping with procurement challenges 7
  12. 12. Part I: Improving financial managementThe presentation and the discussion revolved around five main areas:AWPB credibility, predictability and control: Is the AWPB realistic, andimplemented as intended? Are the control and stewardship exercised in the use ofpublic/project funds?Comprehensiveness and transparency in procurement: Do the ProjectImplementation Manual (PIM) and Procurement Guidelines provide adequate guidanceto all implementing partners clarifying the roles of each actor? Is there effectivemonitoring of contract/agreements and the implementation of contract/agreements.How are these partnerships managed? Does the Project have adequate mechanisms toassess risks?Adherence to provisions and financing agreement, guidelines and policies ofIFAD: Do project staff and implementing partners understand the provision of theFinancing Agreements, Subsidiary Agreement, Guidelines and Policies of IFAD? Howcan projects ensure effective compliances? Are there any grey areas? If yes, what arethe mechanisms in place to address them?Accounting, recording and reporting: Are adequate records and informationproduced, maintained and disseminated to facilitate decision-making, control,management and reporting? What type of information is helpful for the managementfor decision-making? What type of action is required to update and establish controlswith the information?External scrutiny and audit: Do Project Audits adequately cover relevant area asoutlined in the scope of work? Should management audit be started in IFAD-fundedprojects? Should auditor scope of work be tailored to specifically address relevant areasof concern?Part II: Coping with procurement challengesThe following basic procurement cycle was presented and discussed in the group:• originating a purchase• selecting a supplier• ordering, receiving and accepting goods and services• receiving the invoice and making payment• post contract controlA discussion on risk management concluded that three types of risks exist under eachproject. They include:• Strategic risk: long-term adverse impacts from poor decision-making or poor implementation.• Programme risk: failure to comply with procurement legislation, or internal procedures (the procurement code of practice or contract procedure rules) or the lack of documentation to prove compliance (i.e. a clear audit trail).• Project or operational risk: poor contract management; inadequate terms and conditions; failure to deliver services effectively and on time; malfunctioning equipment; hazards to service users, the general public or staff; and damage to property.Read more about this session:Risks: 8
  13. 13. BEST PRACTICES IN DIRECT SUPERVISION AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORTMr Nigel Brett, CPM from IFAD facilitated a speed-sharing session on direct supervisionand implementation support. The following best practices were shared with respect tothe two areas:• Agreeing on the text of the Aide Memoire with the PMU before submitting it to Government for the wrap-up meeting, ensuring consensus and ownership of recommendations.• Following up frequently on supervision recommendations by IFAD and in particular by the CPO during the year.• Ensuring supervision is a “joint” exercise including government, IFAD, local government, NGOs, and other project stakeholders (“joint review”).• Ensuring a flexible interpretation of the project design as described in the appraisal report.• Making supervision missions efficient, allowing for making decisions quickly.• Ensuring project supervision mission members have good understanding of the country and the project in question.• Reducing inefficiency by undertaking joint donor supervision missions in situations where there are multiple donor funders.• Ensuring quick validation and approval of the AWPB/procurement plan by IFAD / supervision missions so that implementation can happen without delays.• Ensuring that the AWPB is realistic.• Enabling direct access to IFAD, timely capacity building of key PMU staff when needed, and quick resolution of implementation problems.• Communicating and sharing of information effectively between CPOs and projects in a country on key implementation issues.• Ensuring regular and continuous support by a team of expert consultants during implementation (particularly in areas such as M&E and financial management).• Holding stakeholder workshops before the finalization of the Aide Memoire so that diverse views can be adequately taken into account.• Ensuring project designs are able to evolve to cope with rapidly changing development contexts (in particular in rapidly growing economies such as Viet Nam).• Ensuring that projects have efficient M&E systems that generate powerful decision making information that is useful for supervision missions.• Ensuring that the list of recommendations is focused and short.• Holding a higher level portfolio review meeting with central government once every six months to resolve higher level policy issues that effect project implementation.• Ensuring that missions maintain a low profile during field visits so that they provide a conducive environment for local communities to open up.• Ensuring that financial management training for the PMU is provided by IFAD as early as possible in the start-up of a project.SCALING UPIn the ‘fishbowl session’ on scaling up investments in rural development, participantsdiscussed the cases of when scaling up succeeds, when it fails and how to know when toeven try it.What does scaling up mean?Scaling up a project can mean a variety of things with an even larger variety of results.It can mean injecting an innovative development project with more money to reach alarger basin of participants. It can mean widening the geographical reach of the project(increasing the size of the project, for example, from coverage of a single district to aprovince, or from provincial to nationwide coverage), or even using it as a model to be 9
  14. 14. replicated in another country. It can also mean designing a second phase of the projectthat includes high profile investors from other development funds and from the privatesector.Role of M&EWhether you scale up by going vertical, horizontal or deeper, it seems that severalfactors need to be considered. One is convincing evidence. Once again, M&E plays animportant role. Discussants came back more than once to the fact that people who areseeking to scale up would be well advised to arm themselves with evidence-based proofthat what they have to recommend really works.Making friends with governmentTaking responsible government officials on field trips to observe and hear for themselveswas one recommended way of winning their support. Appealing to local politicians bydemonstrating to them how well your investments meet the needs of their constituentswas another. Giving credit to political leaders for successful approaches tried on theirwatch was also considered a winning approach to finding and keeping a champion tosupport up-scaling.Being aware of timeMost participants seemed to agree that the process of scaling up takes time. Evenknowing whether it is appropriate to scale up a specific type of investment is likely totake at least 6-10 years. "One has to accept that things will take time," says Nigel Brett,Country Portfolio Manager for Bangladesh. "Not all innovations succeed, and not allinnovations are upscaled. Maybe after five years you realize that it is a boutiqueproject and it is not practical to upscale. One has to be aware when something is notworking, it is important to have that learning approach," Nigel pointed out.Culture and social capitalSome IFAD-funded projects that were immensely successful in the first phase turned outto be less than successful when taken out of context. It is important to keep in mindcultural differences even within a countrys borders. "In the design phase, a project hasto be matched to the local culture and tradition," said Qaim Shah, Country ProgrammeOfficer for Pakistan. Furthermore, social capital can be the driving force behind a projectand this may get lost when a project is expanded and some of the original players are nolonger involved.Scaling up and sustainabilityAn interesting point from NERCORP was that insufficient project funds led to scaling upof their investments. The project was able to expand outreach and become sustainableas villages increasingly agreed to contribute significant amount of resources toinfrastructure and other investments they needed. The project became a catalyst morethan anything.Impartial independent evaluation of an investment to be scaled up proved to be veryuseful in convincing donors and government when one project wanted to scale up. But inanother, when an innovation or investment made sense, it was scaled up without specialsupport financing. For example, just loosening up policies in Bangladesh resulted inwidespread adoption of shallow tube wells improving water supply at village level acrossthe country. 10
  15. 15. Scaling up with cautionThese and other tips on scaling up seemed to encourage the participants. But cautionarytales were also shared. Seemingly successful donor approaches like the IFAD P4K modelin Indonesia can go wrong when key qualitative steps, such as the grassroots levelinstitution building, are left out of the equation. Exporting what is successful from onecountry to another is another common mistake. Enthusiasm for the Aga Khan RuralSupport Programme model in Pakistan prompted some to upscale, only to fail,elsewhere."I think that we need to believe in what we do and have the courage to speak about it,"stressed Mr Thomas Elhaut during the session. "Keep it small, go undetected, test it outand when it proves successful, use the results to influence policy," he pointed out.VALUE CHAINSThe ‘talk show’ facilitated by Mr. Ron Hartman, CPM, was attended by about 35participants. Three speakers were invited to the discussion: Mr David Shearer,Research Program Manager Agribusiness, from the Australian Center for InternationalAgricultural Research (ACIAR), Mr Frank Hartwich, Industrial Development Officer atthe United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), and Mr Rolf Schinkel,Sustainable Agribusiness Advisor from SNV Netherlands Development Organization,Nepal.The discussion centred around seven questions in the areas of defining value chains,common practices applied in the development projects, importance of selection of valuechain for poverty reduction, importance of value chain analysis, key factors indesigning value chain development projects, key issues with implementing value chainprojects and issue of M&E in value chain projects. Key points from the discussioninclude:• Value chain is the mechanism that allows producers, processors, buyers, and sellers — separated by time and space — to gradually add value to products and services as they pass from one link in the chain to the next until reaching the final consumer.• Value chain has two dimensions: theoretical (supply chain development, cluster development, global value chains, and networking for innovation) and practical (increasing value addition, knowledge and technology, and joint innovation development).• Project design needs to be flexible because chains are prone to continuous changes, various chain actors need to participate in design.• Chain extends across segments, PMU is only able to deal with parts (expertise) hence the need to partner.• Projects can help in organizing / building capacities among farmers, they need partnership with firms regarding production technology and product specification• Good value chain analysis helps PMUs to see the "public value" of the project and its development.• Value chain thinking should be part of the toolkit in livelihood improvement.• It allows an assessments of constrains and opportunities, and approaches to resolve, in the context of the whole chain.• It allows public and private engagement from a planning stage and a means to engage stakeholders from the beginning.• Specialists need to value a multi-disciplinary approaches in improving the chains function.• Poor farmers and private sector together have a great business potential.• Without private sector there is NO value chain development. 11
  16. 16. • Value chain development needs public-private-partnership – government and private sector to go hand in hand.• The role of government in value chains is to provide an enabling environment."Its easy to grow tomatoes, its more difficult to get them to market," says Rolf Schinkelfrom SNV. "We have to ask ourselves, why isnt this market working for smallproducers?" he pointed out.The value chain is a mechanism that links producers, buyers and sellers, ultimatelydelivering a higher value and targeted product to the consumer. To use tomatoes as anexample, the value chain might be to teach farmers to grow organic tomatoes, set up acanning factory, build a few roads, create a chic brand and export the high-pricedcanned tomatoes to a supermarket chain in another country.According to David Shearer from ACIAR, "’value chain is a trendy term that we arethrowing around too much. It is basically the intersection of a consumer demand drivenapproach, global market demand and the socio-economic constraints of the producer."To put the value chain approach into practice, agricultural development projects areworking more and more to link small producers with the private sector in contractualagreements. "There is no other party that knows the market better than the privatesector," said Rolf. This is often the most sustainable way to invest. "You cant constantlypump money into parallel structures. Once the tap is turned off, the parallel structuredisappears," referring to the end of a project if private partnerships are not in place."Fairtrade risks becoming one of these parallel structures," he pointed out."It is important for the company itself to invest in the value chain," says Rolf, using theexample of Mars Incorporated, the chocolate, confectionary and beverage conglomerate.Mars has invested a large amount of money in cocoa research and is committed to usingsustainably grown cocoa in Indonesia. The value chain concept is ultimately to buildcapacity in local economies, not to focus on any particular industry. "The idea is to makethe chain work, not to support a particular company," Rolf added.Roy Ayariga, Coordinator, Northern Rural Growth Programme, Ghana, shared hisexperience in applying the value chain approach. "We start with the market. The marketwill dictate the quality and items in demand," though he goes on to explain risks, "worldmarket prices can distort everything. If local prices are high, companies start importingand local producers are left stranded." This is why the value chain needs to beformalized with contractual arrangements between producers and the private sector."Farmers can get cheated in the markets unless you help them to organize forthemselves," concludes Thomas Elhaut, Director, Asia and Pacific, IFAD.Challenges in value chainsThe peer assist session on value chains followed the talk show. Three ‘peer assistees’representing China, Maldives and Viet Nam, shared their challenges.Ms. Azma Ahmed Didi of the Ministry of Fisheries, Agriculture and Marine Resources ofthe Maldives, introduced challenges related to the IFAD-funded Fisheries and AgricultureDiversification Project (FADIP). Those challenges include linking small farmers to bigbuyers, organizing the small farmers and fishermen, increasing their bargaining power,having better quality control, and getting the private sector interested.Here are the suggestions provided by the participants:• use the culture barrier as an advantage, an opportunity in collective marketing 12
  17. 17. • find advantages of buying products directly from the Maldives for the resorts buyers• bring project design limitations to IFADs attention - start small• focus on fisheries that already exist, products that are developed• learn from existing products (like watermelons and papayas) that worked out• promote technology to increase production• do contract farming with the "private sector"• look at the competitive advantage of the identified products• tap existing companies to look for consolidators to provide management services, who should be local• ensure quality/quantityMr. Tran Thi Vien, Project Director for the Programme for Improving Market Participationof the Poor in Tra Vinh in Viet Nam, presented a challenge related to how to promote theparticipation of poor people in pro-poor value links. Participants contributed thefollowing:• dont introduce new products, farmers are not happy, help them choose VLs/products by themselves• project should help farmers find buyers (specific enterprises)• buyers should be provided with capacity building training• learn from other projects that have been doing well in this area• engage the private sector to come to the farmers directly• consider the role of the government and their need to improve the legal frameworkMr. Zhang Mengtangs from the Modular Rural Development Programme, China, shared achallenge related to an organic farming value chain. Specifically, his challenge relates tothe design of the project and the difficulty in its modular approach. He faces challengesin all aspects, from engaging farmers to organic farming, to promoting organic farmingand influencing people to buy organic and bring to value chain. Some of the suggestionshe received include:• focus on market-driven products• use a market path approach• start small and expand• create market-demand advocacy• focus on push and pull (government to farmers, farmers to government)• develop incentives for farmers to grow organic products• explore other organic inputs or methodologies that can increase production (not related to marketing)• link with those who have the market -> export• leave marketing to be done by the companies• aggregate the volume of production - to lessen costs - to increase marginCOMMUNITY-BASED DEVELOPMENTCommunity-based development has become an innovative approach in IFAD-fundedprogrammes. In some cases, the approach has maximized the benefits that theseprogrammes expect to bring to target groups.Three success stories from IFAD-funded activities in India, Nepal and Pakistan highlightwhy a community-based development approach is useful. The key reasons are thefollowing:• The approach is demand-driven. That means the community participates in making decisions on what they need and where development programmes can help. 13
  18. 18. • The approach is also very open as it allows plans to be revised in accordance with villagers’ needs.• Demand-driven development helps to mobilize and link different resources and contributions from donors, the Government and the community.The success story from India, in particular the Songkal Pool Fish Sanctuary on theSimsang River at Rombagre Village, was shared first. Though Songkal Pool was one ofthe famous spots for community fishing for over 30 years, it was selected to be the fishbreeding pool. The decision badly influenced those who made their living by fishing. Theprogramme engaged the community to maintain this innovation. After eight years, thevillagers finally saw how good the innovation was – the fish population blooming, theincrease of income that they got from selling big fish, and the development of eco-tourism as well. The innovation has been replicated in many project villages.Mr. Abdul Karim, shared how to involve women in decision making in mountainous areain Pakistan where most villagers are Muslim. The project design required high ratio ofwomen participation in the implementation of project activities. This was verychallenging for the project as the Muslim women are not allowed to socialize much. Thedecision to involve women led to the formation of women groups with 10 to 25 membersin each. Groups held meetings on a monthly basis to discuss their demands and create"demand lists" which were sent to the project. Project funding was then allocated togroups and used in the most effective way.The story shared by Mr. Raj Babu Shrestha from Nepal is about the participatoryplanning process. Many different tools were used to capture the needs from thecommunity level. In other words, the planning process allowed the villagers decide whatthey wanted to produce and how much capital was needed. The project supported theirefforts by standing beside them to establish common interest groups, providemicrofinance and mobilize outside resources and contributions.RISK AND VULNERABILITY“Risk, vulnerability and shock limit poor peoples participation in the growth process andcause a huge number of people to fall back into poverty", said Sun Yinhong from Chinato open the session.“Risks can be natural/environmental, health related, social, economic and political thataffect households, communities and nations in different and varied proportions,” pointedout Mr Ganesh Thapa who introduced the topic to more than 30 participants. Individuals,groups, markets and the public sector either informally or formally help the poor reduce,mitigate or just cope with risks.Over the years, IFAD has shown its support for risk management in projects thatreduced risks such as watershed development and promotion of savings; risks mitigationthrough diversification such as projects that provided microfinance and formed producersgroups; risks mitigation through insurance e.g. weather-based insurance; and, byproviding loans to projects that respond to disasters e.g. tsunami response projects inSri Lanka, India and Maldives.The Chinas Pilot of Weather Index Insurance (WII): Drought and Heatwave IndexInsurance for Rice is an example of a risk mitigating project supported by IFAD. Thisproject, as Ms Weijing Wang of China shared, is favorable to small farmers in Changfeng,Anhui Province. The WII has less adverse selection process and has potential forreinsurance arrangement.Mr Anura Herath from Sri Lanka showed the risks in adopting new technologies in the 14
  19. 19. Dry Zone Livelihood Support and Partnership Programme of Sri Lanka and suggestedthat future project designs should:• identify a menu of technologies• include strategies using KM tools to update projects with new technologies• include a clear implementation strategy, e.g. mechanism for financing technology adoption• propose crop/animal insurance.The cotton, wheat and vegetables produced in Tajikistan are prone to risks related toweather and pests. Mr Hafij Muninjanov disclosed that his government is working on acrop insurance as part of the Tajikistan Agriculture Reform Programme.There are also institutional related risks involved in implementing IFAD-supportedprojects according to Mr Lamkoise Baite from India. The risks are related to design andactual implementation which affect the IFAD headquarters in Rome, the IFAD countryoffices, the project offices and the community themselves.Further, to deal with risks and vulnerabilities at the project level, the participants of thesession proposed to:• learn from initiatives of other projects e.g. alternating crops, utilisation of communal labour and investing in small livestock• explore insurances that put premium to farmers that better manage their land and other resources• conduct better risk/vulnerability analysis in project design processes (IFAD Climate Screening Tool can be used) and• have a study on prioritizing risks/vulnerabilities where IFAD shall focus on its interventions.Risk and vulnerability are dynamic. New risks and vulnerabilities emerge over time.There is no project that is foolproof to risks and vulnerabilities. However, IFAD-supported projects have to help poor people respond to risks, vulnerabilities and otheremerging challenges.Mr Thomas Elhaut, remarked that IFAD projects should exercise flexibility to capture andrespond to emerging risk and vulnerability issues while at the same time strike a balancein ensuring quality in project implementation to help poor people overcome poverty.Read more about this session:• Dealing with risk and vulnerability: 7-risk-and-vulnerabilitygthapa• Risk and vulnerability: China experience: workshop-n-8-risk-and-vulnerabilitymanagementweijingwang-6189248INTEGRATING RURAL DEVELOPMENT, CLIMATE CHANGE AND SUSTAINABLENATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENTThe issue of climate change is relatively new for IFAD-supported programmes andprojects. The session on integrating Rural Development, Climate Change and SustainableNatural Resource Management, coorganized by the International Centre for IntegratedMountain Development (ICIMOD) and IFAD’s Environment and Climate Division (ECD),provided an opportunity for many project staff from different countries in Asia and thePacific region to learn about IFAD’s new strategy on climate change and provide inputson how to operationalize it. This learning was further strengthened through the 15
  20. 20. presentation of a case study by ICIMOD on community perceptions on climate change,the impacts and resultant responses from the Himalayas.The session was led by Ms Sheila Mwanundu, Senior Technical Advisor, ECD and MrDhrupad Chowdhury, Senior Scientist, ICIMOD. "Agriculture provides livelihoods formany poor rural people and is fundamental to food security, nutrition and employmentgeneration. The poor are highly vulnerable to adverse climate events and degradation ofecosystems and deal with these interlinked challenges in a day to day basis,” said Sheilain her opening remarks. “In order to better support countries to achieve MillenniumDevelopment Goal targets and global food security, business as usual is not an option. Ashift in paradigm to an integrated response to climate change, natural resourcedegradation and rural underdevelopment at all levels is critical,” she pointed out.The session was structured around two short presentations followed by speed sharing ofexperiences, including specific actions identified around the following key thematicareas:• IFADs strategy for supporting Climate Change interventions to reduce vulnerability of smallholders and the poorest farmer.• Integration of the Climate Change intervention into project and COSOP.• Coping strategy for rural poor people.Active participation and responses from the participants reflected a diversity ofexperiences and issues faced by Project Directors across the sectors. The immediateneeds can be summarized as following:• Clarify IFADs role with other development partners and private business entities based on IFADs comparative advantage to support poor rural people.• Build the capacity at all levels and engage with research partners to come up with the tools and technologies which can benefit the rural poor, in terms of mitigation and adaptation to climate change.• Provide institutional support to database management on climate change.• Harmonize the application of tools developed by IFAD and other development partners to minimize transaction costs at the project level.• Institutionalize and localize farmer groups affected by climate change.• Promote bottom up planning process response to climate change.• Improve information flow through KM and sharing.• Conduct comprehensive research on cropping pattern response to the climate change.• Promote diversification of farming practices.The comments and concerns generated during the session will be addressed through theIFAD Environment and Natural Resource Management Policy to be submitted to theboard for approval in May 2011.Read more about this session:• Integrating rural development, climate change and sustainable natural resource management in Asia and the Pacific: nrm-dhrupadchowdhury 16
  21. 21. SHARING BEST PRACTICES IN KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTIFAD country programmes are taking strides in Knowledge Management (KM). Duringthe first KM session, Ms Su Juan from China, Ms Ankita Handoo from India and MrYolando Arban from the Philippine shared their stories.The Knowledge and Learning Market (KLM) in the Philippines has now become anannual event in Philippines. In 2010, over 1,000 people gathered for the 4th KLM tolearn and share their knowledge. Projects and rural communities demonstrated theirknow-how and showcased their products. While a simultaneous policy and investmentforum brought together researchers, practitioners and policy makers discussed relevantconcerns which can enhance poverty alleviation efforts. Now, the KLM has becomeintegrated within the government with the National Economic Development Authority(NEDA), the co-ordinating agency, taking the lead. This has been possible due to thecontinuous support and planning of a network of people working within the IFADfamily, both active and closed projects. A technical working group coordinates theorganization of this event. While communities market their products and attract thepublic within their stalls, knowledge champions have been a driving force in thepromotion of the event.In China, changes have been slower but significant on the KM front according to SuJuan, who shared how “getting round tables in the spirit of participation” was lookedupon as an invitation for dinner rather than a serious workshop setting. She gave sometips which make implementing KM training with senior staff a "unique" experience.Bosses were not used to sitting around small tables and posting material on flipchartsaround the room. At first, there was resistance to this type of methods for sharinginformation and knowledge. However, the China country office then demonstrated theend results and benefits that accrue: “when you manage knowledge better, youmanage projects better”. Senior staff begun to realize that they actually discussrelevant issues and that to share knowledge does not only mean to discuss somethingin lecture halls of universities but resides in the everyday implementation context thatproject staff work in.Ankita understood Sus context and struggles for change as she herself faced similarchallenges when she was first hired. It was a challenge to overcome mind sets andbureaucratic processes. In the first two years there were no significant results toreport. After having gained training in the use of knowledge-sharing tools, she began tointroduce this in the India Portfolio Reviews. The greatest opportunity for change camewhen Ankita participated in the mid-term review missions of ongoing projects. She wasable to suggest specific changes in budget allocations since many projects were sharingknowledge informally but they did not have any budget for KM. She advised on thenumber and type of activities projects could consider which first needs to be based ontheir specific knowledge needs. Three years on, with formal budgetary allocations,specific terms of reference for hiring qualified KM staff, she now looks forward to thecontinued growth of knowledge sharing and exchange amongst IFAD projects in a moresystematic way.Key recommendations coming from this sharing session with participants focused onthe relevance and need for knowledge sharing at ALL levels. From farmers exchangingtheir expertise that results in food on our plate, to government cross-ministry andcross donor sharing. The sharing of knowledge between closed IFAD-supported projectswith new and ongoing ones is also required. 17
  22. 22. BUILDING CAPACITY TO SHARE KNOWLEDGEThe session led by Mr Yolando Arban aimed to share and discuss experiences in buildingcapacity in knowledge sharing that were initiated by ENRAP (Knowledge Networking forRural Development in Asia Pacific) and are now being mainstreamed by the Asia and thePacific Division.Shalini Kala, ENRAP coordinator, shared how experiential knowledge was something thatpeople have learned to value in their daily work. While project staff face challenges interms of time, motivation and mechanisms for knowledge sharing, the benefitsdemonstrated through a more effective performance has led to a change in perceptions.ENRAP supported the efforts in building knowledge sharing skills amongst staff of IFAD-supported projects and country programme offices.Knowledge sharing is a component of KM. The more effectively people share knowledge,the more effectively the knowledge can be managed. IFAD-financed projects generate alot of knowledge but often lack the capacity to share it with their target audience. Toensure that knowledge is shared, people have to have the capacity to analyse relevantinformation that can be useful. The following specific training programmes wereorganized:• Training on systematization – a technique useful for participatory analysis of the outcomes of project interventions with rural communities.• Writeshops – documentation of knowledge through both visual and written means.• Training in knowledge-sharing skills – Ms Lucie Lamoureux and Ms Allison Hewlitt have worked with ENRAP for some time now. To date they conducted four training workshops on various knowledge-sharing tools and techniques.Shalini pointed out that many of the new methods that are being taught can also beused for working with communities, such as the world café and chat shows. These areinteresting ways of sharing knowledge, while engaging the audience. Apart from face-to-face methods, electronic tools can also disseminate locally generated knowledge.Lucie described the community called KM4Dev – a 1,200 member network of KMprofessionals and those interested in KM who support each other through the network.She shared some examples and contrasts on doing chat show versus presentations, anddescribed methods such as peer-assist which is useful when someone has a challengeand would like ideas and solutions from her peer group.This work has been translated into a Knowledge Sharing Curriculum which wasdeveloped based on the training with the KF group. This is a guide which explains theknowledge sharing methods and tools in a step-by-step manner.The guide has been "tested" for real life application and refined based on the feedbackfrom the India CPO. Ms Ankita Handoo, the KM specialist from the India and PawanKumar from the Livelihoods Improvement Programme in the Himalayas (Uttaranchal)trained project staff. Ankita shared how after her initial training on the tools she had tointroduce this to her project colleagues, began with one method for their portfolioreviews as there were initial reservations but it ended up that peer-assist was a populartool. Eventually project directors and other colleagues were convinced of how improvedknowledge sharing contributes to improved project performance.Ms Chase Palmeri was the last guest on the show and she narrated the journey ofknowledge sharing capacity building within IFAD and what can be expected in the future.She focused on how the external review process at IFAD led to the need for a knowledgeKM strategy and how the Asia and the Pacific Division, in the context of ENRAP coming tothe end, has been supporting projects through the new grant implemented by the Food 18
  23. 23. and Agriculture Organization (FAO) on Knowledge Sharing Skills (KSS). The projectcovers training in writing skills, systematization, and knowledge sharing methods andtools.After the initial interviews, Yolando invited many questions from the audience and alsoreceived queries through video and SMS. Participants were very keen to share theirexperiences as well as understand how KM can be tailored to different clientele (aspecific concern of Atsuko Toda, IFAD Country Program Manager). Some advice from theguests included:• Linking KM to M&E so that the knowledge being generated helps in tracking progress but is also "trackable".• Determining an appropriate KM tool by looking at the purpose of the activity. For example, video can capture stories, while systematization is a tool for in-depth analysis.• Allocate budget for KM activities in projects.Mr Pankaj Gupta, Independent Film Maker and Consultant, shared how training in videodocumentation helped project staff capture field experiences. Participants from Chinaand India shared how systematization, as a participatory research method to assessproject interventions, generated credible and qualitative information for projects.Participants from Mongolia described how they have used knowledge sharing tools inimplementing their communication strategy and how that has helped to scale up lessonslearned through their project. The Sri Lanka team shared a story on how knowledgesharing influenced policy change.Read more about this session:• Introducing Knowledge Sharing Methods and Tools: AND LIVELIHOODSWe all strive for sustainable impact that improves livelihoods and reduces poverty. Buthow do we integrate new knowledge, innovations and approaches, developed throughresearch, into smallholder farming systems to achieve a long-term sustainable impact?Research (technical, economic and policy) generates new knowledge that can beadapted to smallholder based farming systems. But it is often limited in its ability togenerate sustainable change and impact to achieve development goals.A group from Australia, China, India, Mongolia, Sri Lanka, Viet Nam and some IFADstaff discussed these issues. The group agreed that research has the capacity to:• Generate valued new information that can be delivered to smallholders to empower them for better decision making.• Improve institutional decision making by substantiating the decision making process.• Allow stakeholders to engage in new areas of development.However, the group also recognized a range of constraints that impede the ability forresearch to achieve sustainable impact in the development efforts. These constraintscould be defined as:• Geographical separation that limits information exchange.• Business to business competitiveness that prevents knowledge exchange.• Ineffective timeframe alignment that reduces the relevance of information.• Resource limitations which diminishes the required commitment. 19
  24. 24. Improved communication and coordination that better integrates KM and institutionalworking arrangements has the potential to improve the impact of research but requiresa commitment by the range of stakeholders engaged in the development continuum.ICTS FOR LIVELIHOODSAbout 30 participants joined the session on Information and CommunicationTechnologies (ICTs) for Livelihoods, facilitated by Ms. Shalini Kala from IDRC. Followingbrief presentations by Mr. B. Batpurev (Mangolia) and Mr. Sean Siochru (Cambodia) onthe use of ICTs for livelihoods in their contexts, session participants were divided intothree groups to exchange their views on:“What should IFAD be doing to support the use of ICTs for livelihoods?”The following are some key recommendations:• Do not forget about other direction e.g., Ekgaons experiment with remote sensing.• Upscale current pilots initiatives: Wider connectivity - better productivity.• Include ICTs as one component and/or sub-component in all future projects, facilitate linkage between media and community.• Subsidize the cost of mobile phone sets for the use of community.• Use ICTs for disseminating weather/market information.• Provide more training to the community members on the use of technologies including mobile phones, computers etc.• Identify how to use ICTs to increase the impact of IFAD-funded projects.• Use ICTs for extension services; market related activities at local level• Work with private sector and maintain international standards e.g., UNICODE.• Carry out social science research beyond technology determination, localize/customize according to the local context.• Promote appropriate and feasible/sustainable technologies, do not forget the traditional media such as radio, television, etc.Read more about this session:• ICT4R: NETWORK ANALYSISMs Shalini Kala, ENRAP Coordinator, led the session on social network analysis (SNA) –an exercise conducted among the IFAD Asia and the Pacific network. She mentionedthat, while IFAD was successfully implementing projects in the field, in the late 1990’sand early 2000’s, there was less interaction and knowledge exchange between differentprojects in the region and even within its countries.As IFAD programmes have similar objectives and implementation modalities, it wouldbe highly beneficial to share pertinent information and knowledge to the projectimplementers and stakeholders. This resulted in forming a network of people fromIFAD-assisted projects and partners through ENRAP. The network facilitated interactionamong projects, countries and regions to discuss and share experiences and lessons,contributing to enhanced project implementation.The Social Network Analysis is a tool that analyses relationships between groups,people and organizations. This method is most often used in the fields of health,medicine and organizational development, and is relatively new to the developmentsector. SNA maps show people in circles. Arrows indicate and reflect what interactionsare taking place in the networks. Some of the networks that were discussed were onIFAD Asia Pacific Networking. The overall trend reflects an increased interaction among 20
  25. 25. project staff in different countries. The first regional network analysis was conducted in2009. The mapping exercise helps to:• understand how people are connecting with one another• how PDs interact across geographic and cultural boundaries• understand how people communicate and their attitudes towards networking• provide insights for transition of knowledge network programme to IFADParticipants in this exercise were IFAD country teams, CPMs, CPOs, IFAD HQ and projectstaff, IDRC, and others. The maps were generated based on surveys. Among thethematic networks, the topics related to agriculture, KM and gender were very dense.This indicates that a major focus is on cross cutting issues such as the ones mentionedabove. Attitude towards sharing showed that people need more information andknowledge sharing to do their job. Major learning from the network mapping is thefollowing:• CPMs are the centre of the national networks.• There are strong common interests.• Good facilitation leads to good networks.• Networks are growing and people find them useful.• E-mail and mobile are the most popular forms of communications.• Value is given to experience sharing.• The overall density of people who interact every other week increased over years.• Interactions are mostly based on needs.Read more about this session:• Knowledge networking: kalaapoorvamishraPUBLIC-PRIVATE-PEOPLE PARTNERSHIPMr Mattia Prayer-Galletti, CPM, IFAD, started the session with his experience as CPM inIndia. Public-private-people partnership (PPPP) is a common feature of the work of hiscountry team. Multi-stakeholder workshops are a constant feature of design in theircountry strategy. The team realized they need multiple partners and actors with differentvisions. The idea is to reach a level of mutual respect and find comparative advantage.The two main components are community institutional building and livelihood productionand marketing. He said we should even talk of PPPPP, adding the pro-poor dimension.But there exists a lack of trust between the community and private sector, as well as thegovernment and private sector. "The beauty of the exercise", said Mattia, "is that itbrings to the table cats and dogs and they come up with common objectives together.This ensures ownership at all levels". He believes IFADs role is to be there with goodintention without forcing dialogue, to be an honest broker and try to find win-wins, whileidentifying what the different obligations of each player are.Ms Atsuko Toda, CPM, IFAD, shared that in Viet Nam, PPP are useful in terms ofsustainability and services (value chain analysis and action plan, credit, incentive funds,extension, implement arrangements - market demands, etc.). Her team has talked to alot of companies, with IFAD interventions addressing the needs of the private sector, andidentified which are good to work with. But she is not a strong believer in conversion oncommon objectives as Mattia is. They both agree that project management is the keyand that managers are bureaucrats poorly-equipped to work with the private sector. AsMattia says, "we lend to governments, we have no experience in dealing with the privatesector... this set of rules is difficult to break". 21
  26. 26. Other insights on the topic were provided:• Not all people or public is good and the private sector not formally bad. Different areas need different strategies.• In India, bigger industries are willing to come if the environment is good and the infrastructure is there. More partners, less risk.• The public and private sector have different interests and speak a different language. But the farmers interest is having income and that space can be shared - and be the basis for partnerships.• Another dimension of PPPP is the social dynamic of peers. In Indonesia, since the rubber quality is low, a tire company sought to improve the quality of rubber by enhancing farmers’ knowledge. The company said farmer could start selling directly to them, which was interesting as it increased investment, but created social conflict since the farmers had good relationships with the middlemen through which they were used sell.• Business partnership should be included in project design. Both public and private goods and the infrastructure should be based where growth is needed.• People belong to the "private" dimension, our job (IFAD) is to develop common interest and linkages.• In Viet Nam, the Government gives subsidies to the public sector but does not trust the private sector.• In Indonesia, Mars Inc. conducted a forum on cocoa where PPPP sit together with a goal of transferring technology and empowering farmers. So whats in it for the private sector? A lot of effort but aiming for the long-term sustainability of cocoa. The forum also aligns messages sent to farmers so they are not confused.• There should be input from the buyer to improve products. They are the ones we should be talking to, not the corporate social responsibility people.• There is a blurring of people and private. We should think of service delivery, public, private, and farmers organizations – a polycentric approach.• At the Davos forum they are talking of public, private and civil society, which means IFAD has no role in this. But what is the interest and what do they bring? We need to have definitions. Also, can the private sector be driving/leading food security?• The private sector is investing heavily in CGIAR. They can invest where they like and IFAD can be a broker.OPEN SPACEThe last day of the workshop was marked by an ‘Open space’. Participants were askedto come forward with issues that they either wanted to raise but did not have a chanceto, or to suggest new topics for discussion. About 17 sessions were eventually proposedand the group discussions took up the entire morning. The topics were:• trans-boundary issues in NRM• how to influence governments• south-south cooperation• addressing information asymmetry in value chains and forward-sales contracts• impact of disasters on microfinance• poverty debt reduction improving the revenue of farmers (especially with ICTs)• adaptation to climate change• more representation of the beneficiaries in project implementation committees• coping with delayed implementation• market development for selected value chains• sustainability and innovative financial investments• access to information by farmers to increase agricultural produce and information delivery for poverty reduction• key summaries of mini-workshop on evaluation 22
  27. 27. • dealing with cassava pests and disease• innovation to improve the EDE continuum• strengthening coordination among project stakeholders on issues and strategies on convergence with other development schemes• sustainability and exit strategiesFIELD TRIPOn the fourth day of the event, the Government of China organized a field visit for allworkshop participants to IFAD-funded projects in Longan County, Guangxi ZhuangAutonomous Region, China. The visit mainly focused on the following areas:• small-scale infrastructure such as water tanks and biogas• health and education infrastructure and servicesThe field trip was very much appreciated by all participants. 23
  28. 28. ANNEX 1: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTSCHINA HOST COUNTRY Mr. Li ZhengxuanMr. Li Xinhai Officer, Foreign FinanceCounsellor Gansu Provincial Project ManagementChina Mission to IFAD South Gansu Poverty ReductionP.R. China Programme P.R. ChinaMr Wu YingyunDeputy Chief Mr. Huang QuanchengDivision of International Finance and Depute General DirectorRegional Co-operation Department of AgricultureFinancial Department of Guangxi South Gansu Poverty ReductionProvince of P.R. China ProgrammeNanning, P.R. China P.R. ChinaMr Guo Xuquan Mr. He WeiVice Director Officer, Department of AgricultureDepartment of Agriculture South Gansu Poverty ReductionGuangxi, Nanning ProgrammeP.R. China P.R. ChinaMr. Zhu Wei Mr. Li BingchengDirector Project Deputy DirectorDepartment of Foreign Capital Market, Inner Mongolia Autonomous RegionNational Development and Reform Rural Advance ProgramCommission Bldg No. 4, Xinqu, Ulanchabu PrefectureBeijing, P.R. China 012000 Inner Mongolia P. R. ChinaCHINA PROJECTS Tel: 86-474-4886001 Email: wlcbifad@126.comMr Feng YaobinDeputy Director Mr. Meng YunzhenEnvironmental Conservation and Poverty DirectorReduction Program, Shanxi Ulanqab PrefectureNo. 85 Xinjian Rd., Taiyuan, Shanxi Inner Mongolia Autonomous RegionP.R. China Rural Advance ProgramTel: 86-351-8235220 Project Management OfficeE-mail: Ulanqab Prefecture P. R. ChinaMs. Wang RuiEnvironmental Conservation and Poverty Mr. Hu GuangmingReduction Program, Yinchuan Vice SecretaryNo. 3 Shuichang Lane Inner Mongolia Autonomous RegionYichuan, P.R. China Rural Advance ProgramTel: 00869516720612 Project Management OfficeE-mail: Ulanqab Prefecture P. R. ChinaMr. Qibin DuanDirector Mr. Gao JieSouth Gansu Poverty Reduction Staff, Project Management OfficeProgramme Inner Mongolia Autonomous RegionNo. 1 Qin An Rd Rural Advance Program730030 Lanzhou, P. R. China Ulanqab PrefectureTel: 86931 8485131 P. R. ChinaE-mail: 24
  29. 29. Mr. Zhao Yuping Mr. Qiu YonghongDirector Vice-DirectorInner Mongolia Autonomous Region Sichuan Post Earthquake AgricultureRural Advance Program Project, Project Management OfficeProject Management Office P.R. ChinaUlanqab Prefecture E-mail: scncny@vip.163.comP. R. China Mr. Chen XiaopingMr. Zhao Guoming Vice-DirectorDirector Mianyang Prefecture ProjectModular Rural Advance Program Management OfficeNo. 2 Zhongshan Rd, Urumqi Sichuan Post Earthquake AgricultureP. R. China ProjectTel: 86-991-2383243 P.R. ChinaE-mail: E-mail: biogasmy@163.comMr Zhang Mengtang Mr. He QibinDeputy Director General of Xinjiang Deputy DirectorUyghur Project Office West Guangxi Poverty-Alleviation ProjectModular Rural Advance Program Guangxi Administration Center ofP. R. China Foreign Funded Project for Agriculture 135 Qixing RoadMr. Xu Xiaolin 530022, Nanning, Guangxi, P.R. ChinaDirector E-mail: qibinhe01@gmail.comDabieshan Area Poverty ReductionProgram Mr Song Yue JiaNo. 260 Dongfanghong Avenue, Xinyang West Guangxi Poverty Alleviation ProjectCity, Henan Guangxi ProvinceP.R. China P.R. ChinaTel: +86376-6365636Email: Mr Lu Zhi Heng West Guangxi Poverty Alleviation ProjectMr. Zhao Dongqing Guangxi ProvinceDeputy Director General P.R. ChinaDabieshan Area Poverty ReductionProgram Ms. Su JuanXinjiang Uyghur Project Office Knowledge FacilitatorP.R. China Foreign Capital Project ManagementE-mail: Center, State Leading Group Office for Poverty Alleviation and DevelopmentMr. Shi Jianjie P.R. ChinaDeputy Director Tel: +8610-58222970Dabieshan Area Poverty Reduction Email: sujuan1120@gmail.comProgramP.R. China Ms. Yiching SongE-mail: Knowledge Facilitator UN Building, N0.2 LiangmaheMr. Li Zhen Nanlu, BeijingProject Financial Manager P. R. ChinaDabieshan Area Poverty Reduction Email: China Mr. Peter SituE-mail: Implementation Specialist P.R. China E-mail: 25
  30. 30. OTHER PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES BHUTANBANGLADESH Mr Sangay Project DirectorMr. Sheikh Mohsin Agriculture, Marketing and EnterpriseProject Director Promotion Programme (659-BT)Sunamganj Community Based Resource Program Facilitation OfficeManagement Project Khangma, TashigangLocal Government Engineering Tel.: + 975 4 535112Department (LGED),LGED Bhaban (level 11), Agargaon;Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka, BangladeshTel: 0088028151387, 8155581 CAMBODIAMobile: 0088(0)1715005787E-mail: Mr. Vuthirith Ouk Tonle Sap Poverty Reduction andMr. Khalilur Rahman Smallholder Dev ProjectProject Director (LGED component) Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry andMarket Infrastructure Development Fisheries, 200, Norodom BlvdProject in Charland Regions Phnom PenhLocal Government Engineering Kingdom of CambodiaDepartment (LGED) Tel.: +855-23993342RDEC-LGED Bhaban (Level 3) Agargaon Mobile: +855-12883148Sher-e-Bangla Nagar E-mail: oukvuthirith@yahoo.com1207 Dhaka, Bangladesh 0088028144578Mobile: 0088(0)1715018314 Mr. Hok KimthournE-mail: Deputy National Project Coordinator Rural Poverty Reduction Project in PreyMr. Abdur Razzaque Veng and Svay RiengProject Director Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry andNational Agricultural Technology Project Fisheries, 200, Norodom BlvdBangladesh Agriculture Research Council Phnom Penh(BARC) Campus Kingdom of CambodiaAIC Bhaban (4th Floor), Farmgate Tel.: +855-239933421207 Dhaka, Bangladesh Mobile: +855-12883148Tel: 00888158055 E-mail: kimthourn@yahoo.comMobile: 0088(0)1552381105 /; Mr. Ngin Deputy National Project Coordinator Rural Livelihoods Improvement ProjectMr Md. Shahidul Haque in Kratie Preah Vihear and Ratanakiri -Project Director #8005-KH (Grant)Participatory Small-Scale Water Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry andResources Sector Project FisheriesLocal Government Engineering 200, Norodom BlvdDepartment (LGED) Phnom Penh, Kingdom of CambodiaRDEC-LGED Bhaban (Level -5) Tel.: +85523993342Agargaon, Sher-e-Bangla Nagar Mobile: +855-12315192Dhaka, Bangladesh Email: 00880-2-9127411 (work),Mobile: 0088(0)1713066071 Ms Soa SomonthaEmail :; Finance E-mail: 26
  31. 31. Mr. Duong Kim Chhean Ms. Rupa MistryMonitoring and Evaluation Specialist ManagerRural Livelihooods Improvement Project Tejaswini Rural Women’s EmpowermentE-mail: Programme IndiaINDIA E-mail: rupmgreen@yahoo.comMr. Manoj Sinha Mr. Pravanjan MohapatraDistrict Programme Manager Orissa Tribal Empowerment andChattisgarh Tribal Development Livelihoods ProgrammeProgramme IndiaA-21, Sector 1, Gitanjali Nagar, E-mail: pravanjan@otelp.orgBehind Bottle HouseRaipur -492001 Mr. Lamkhosei BaiteChattisgarh, India Programme Coordinator andTel. 91-771-6452634 Development StrategistEmail: North Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project forMr Susanta Nanda Upland AreasProject Director IndiaOrissa Tribal Empowerment and E-mail: pcdsnercormp@gmail.comLivelihoods ProgrammeTDCCOL Building, 2nd Floor LAO PDRNear Rupali Square, BhoiNagar, 751022 Bhubaneswar Mr Soulichanh PhonekeoOrissa, India Provincial Programme DirectorTel: 91-674-2542709 Rural Livelihood ImprovementE-mail: Programme in Attapeu and Sayabouri Attapeu Province, Lao PDRMr. Daniel J. Ingty Phone and Fax: +856 36 211884Project Director Mobile Phone: +856 20 5521416Livelihoods Improvement Project Email: for the Himalayas (Meghalaya)Behind Laitumkhran Post Mr Chattawa KeokhamphetOffice Upland Road Project Director793001 Shillong, Meghalaya Rural Livelihood ImprovementIndia Programme in Attapeu and SayabouriTel: 91- 3642-502409 Sayabouri Province, Lao PDRE-mail: Email: chattawa@gtzrural.orgMr. O.P. Bairwa Mr. Vinoth VansyProject Coordinator, MPOWER Project DirectorMitigating Poverty in Western Rajasthan Sustainable Natural ResourceNear RTO Office, BJS Colony Management and ProductivityPaota-C-Road Enhancement ProjectJodhpur -324003 Lao PDRIndia Email: vinus_lao02@yahoo.comE-mail: Vanthalack ChanthaboulyMr K. Noorudeen Meer Lao PDRDeputy DirectorMitigating Poverty in Western RajasthanNear RTO Office, BJS ColonyPaota-C-RoadJodhpur -324003India 27