Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Walking the                                Impact Pathway:                             The     CIALCA Experience       in ...
CIALCA: realizing the „D‟ in „R4D‟Goal: delivery of science-based agriculturalknowledge to farming households in mandate a...
MilestonesActive impact pathways, involving all stakeholdersalong the entire value chain, are leading to activeevaluation ...
Conceptualizing „knowledge‟Knowledge is: „Effective action in the domain ofexistence‟Knowledge ≠ InformationInformation do...
A cognitive model of change                   Learning:                   developing                   perception to      ...
From knowledge(?) to impact(?): the oldwayClassical technology transfer by „science push‟.Linear transfer of standardized ...
From knowledge to impact: the newwayRecognition of the need for feedback from farmers interms of priorities and preference...
Evolution of the „new way‟: agriculturalinnovation systemsContemporary paradigm for conceptualizing andorganizing AR4D int...
Impact PathwaysDefinition: the causal links by way research achieves itsintended impactAn intentional strategy for focusin...
Impact Pathways: CIALCA action sites                     Source: Briones et al., 2004
Impact Pathways: Satellite sites                                               Satellite sites are used to evaluate       ...
Impact Pathways: wider mandateareaAutonomous diffusion of CIALCA innovations isassumed to happen organically beyond action...
“…at least 25% of the population of the mandate      areas is aware of CIALCA-related activities”%           MANDATE AREA
“…at least 5% of that population is actively seeking    access       to knowledge and technologies promoted by    CIALCA”%...
Time and the „adoption‟ curve:             where are we?                                                    100%          ...
Impact Pathway: BXW in BurundiIn November 2010, BXW disease officially reported to be present intwo provinces in Burundi.C...
Impact pathway: Adoption of ISFM   through participatory on farm trialsResearcher-designed, farmer-managed ISFM adaptation...
Communication channels and productsCIALCA Knowledge Resource Centre establishedlate 2010 to support the activation of impa...
How the pathway + channelshapes the impactDirect vs. intermediaries (relatively littleawareness of CIALCA through NGOs and...
Characteristics of various communicationchannels
Challenges for outscalingsupported by ICT4DDigital divide: the fasted broadband connectionavailable in Burundi is 1/10 the...
Typical geographical distribution of websitevisitors
Effective impact pathways: downstream           challenges           Level of education           Geographical distance an...
Challenge: Dealing with increasing knowledgecomplexity                More complexity would entail                farmer t...
Opportunities: Dealing with increasingknowledge complexityStandard extension models provide adapted solutions toestablishe...
RecommendationsPlanning of impact pathways are absolutely integral toproject design and implementation. They must beembedd...
PIPA
Recommendations IIGoing forward, it would bode well for us to critically reflecton and evaluate where we are, where we hav...
Biting the bulletThere is no silver bullet (or even bronze bullet…)System complexity is a given (people and theirdecisions...
van Schagen - Walking the impact pathway: The CIALCA Experience in Mobilizing Agricultural Knowledge for the African Great...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

van Schagen - Walking the impact pathway: The CIALCA Experience in Mobilizing Agricultural Knowledge for the African Great Lakes Region

4,545 views

Published on

Presentation delivered at the CIALCA international conference 'Challenges and Opportunities to the agricultural intensification of the humid highland systems of sub-Saharan Africa'. Kigali, Rwanda, October 24-27 2011.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

van Schagen - Walking the impact pathway: The CIALCA Experience in Mobilizing Agricultural Knowledge for the African Great Lakes Region

  1. 1. Walking the Impact Pathway: The CIALCA Experience in Mobilizing Agricultural Knowledge for the African Great Lakes RegionVAN SCHAGEN| NJUKWE | PAUL | SENGELE | MAZIBO | BLOMME | VANLAUWE | VANASTEN
  2. 2. CIALCA: realizing the „D‟ in „R4D‟Goal: delivery of science-based agriculturalknowledge to farming households in mandate areasImpact orientation: direct and measureable changein farmer livelihoods attributable to our research anddevelopment interventionImpact at scale: Mandate areas across the 3countries comprise 8.5 million people and we expectpositive impacts on at least 50,000 households
  3. 3. MilestonesActive impact pathways, involving all stakeholdersalong the entire value chain, are leading to activeevaluation and dissemination of CIALCA relatedtechnologies and informationIn the CIALCA intervention areas: By 2012 at least25% of the population of the mandate areas is awareof CIALCA-related activities and at least 5% of thatpopulation is actively seeking access to knowledgeand technologies promoted by CIALCA
  4. 4. Conceptualizing „knowledge‟Knowledge is: „Effective action in the domain ofexistence‟Knowledge ≠ InformationInformation does not lead to action unless it is withinthe „domain of existence‟ of the holder.Example 1: Training farmers on how to fly a 747Jumbo jet is not knowledge, because it is notactionable and irrelevant.Example 2: „Apply fungicide‟ – could be outside thedomain of existence if it is not available, or far too
  5. 5. A cognitive model of change Learning: developing perception to recognize threats and opportunities and take action accordingly Innovating: acting in relation to threats and opportunities in a given domain of Diagram adapted from: Jiggins existence and Röling, 1999)
  6. 6. From knowledge(?) to impact(?): the oldwayClassical technology transfer by „science push‟.Linear transfer of standardized technology, farmersare passive recipients. Farmer to farmer diffusionwas assumed to occur organically. „Hard system‟and technology driven.This approach does not work well in risky,heterogeneous systems and agro-ecologies (GR inAsia worked better than in sub-Saharan Africa)Serious equity and gender concernsModels: ToT, T&V extension
  7. 7. From knowledge to impact: the newwayRecognition of the need for feedback from farmers interms of priorities and preferences, someconsideration given to farmers own knowledge. Both„hard‟ and „soft‟ systems approaches.Places more emphasis on participatory, multi-stakeholder, inter- and trans-disciplinary, and client-driven research agendas. „Bottom up‟.More equity- and gender-sensitiveModels: AKIS, FFS, PBB
  8. 8. Evolution of the „new way‟: agriculturalinnovation systemsContemporary paradigm for conceptualizing andorganizing AR4D interventionsStrong recognition of system interdependencies,heterogeneity of actors, multiplicity of „knowledges‟Emphasis on institutions, systems, platforms and learningIn an AIS, innovation as an emergent property From CIALCA as R4D to RinD: we are embedded inthe AIS From technologies to innovations
  9. 9. Impact PathwaysDefinition: the causal links by way research achieves itsintended impactAn intentional strategy for focusing on high-impactinterventions. Much more thought-out than simple projectlogic(objectives activities outputs outcomes).Understanding how impact is reached becomes anessential element in research design (ie. pathwayselucidated and built-in at project inception!)The CIALCA impact pathways aim to bridge research anddevelopment by establishing operational interfacesbetween stakeholders.
  10. 10. Impact Pathways: CIALCA action sites Source: Briones et al., 2004
  11. 11. Impact Pathways: Satellite sites Satellite sites are used to evaluate best-bet options, (developed in the action sites), under leadership of development partners. This approach is mainly an interaction between CIALCA, outscaling partners and government extension.CIALCA outreach places strong emphasis on partnerships with developmentorganizations and farmer associations. Several hundred established partnershipsto date.Assumptions:• Partners have interest, the resources and the will to out-scale improved technologies;• Partnership with development organizations is an effective strategy for reaching out to many thousands, rapidly and cost effectively;• Farmer organizers have the capacity and the commitment to catalyzing horizontal dissemination at the grassroots level.
  12. 12. Impact Pathways: wider mandateareaAutonomous diffusion of CIALCA innovations isassumed to happen organically beyond action andsatellite sitesSupported by mass-media such as radio andtelevision programming where possible, pluspossible reach from public extension and „leakage‟from development partners (NGOs, CBOs) applyingour innovations beyond AS/SS.Difficult to estimate potential impact ex-ante (what isthe rate of grassroots diffusion, to what extent aretrained farmer‟s associations etc. captiveaudiences?)
  13. 13. “…at least 25% of the population of the mandate areas is aware of CIALCA-related activities”% MANDATE AREA
  14. 14. “…at least 5% of that population is actively seeking access to knowledge and technologies promoted by CIALCA”% MANDATE AREA
  15. 15. Time and the „adoption‟ curve: where are we? 100% ?Impact assessment +/- Adoption Time: Early adopters Late adopters Technology adaptation
  16. 16. Impact Pathway: BXW in BurundiIn November 2010, BXW disease officially reported to be present intwo provinces in Burundi.Comite National de LutteContre les Maladies et Ravageurs desPlantes (under MINAGRI) called a meeting of developmentstakeholders in February 2011, nationwide BXW surveyrecommended.National stakeholder platform established (MINAGRI, ISABU,CIALCA, ASARECA, FAO, CRS)National awareness raising campaign developed, CIALCA and FAOtake the lead. Adapted BXW factsheet developed by CIALCA andtranslated, disseminated to all (3000+) community-level governmentextension agents across the country.Six awareness-raising radio messages have been developed andbeen aired multiple times for seven weeks on 5 radio stations withnational coverage.CIALCA BXW video has been adapted and translated, and is beingbroadcast on two TV channels, including RNTB.Impact remains to be seen…
  17. 17. Impact pathway: Adoption of ISFM through participatory on farm trialsResearcher-designed, farmer-managed ISFM adaptation trials inSK. The aim was to increase farmer understanding and acceptanceof the ISFM technologies and collect data across a wide range ofagro-ecological/socio-economic zones.Farmers were provided with a trial package (inputs, a trial protocol,and a field data book). Facilitation by CIALCA, NGO agronomistsand farmer technical advisors assist in trial installation, managementand data collectionResult: 85% of farmers happy with training received. 87% of farmersreceived acceptable or good facilitation. Significant learning aboutISFM by farmers.Post-trial adoption rates were relatively low!“ISFM technologies could match better to their realities”Type III trials (ie. farmer designed – farmer managed) could help infurther adapting the ISFM technologies to the farmers‟ needs andconstraints to reach higher impact.
  18. 18. Communication channels and productsCIALCA Knowledge Resource Centre establishedlate 2010 to support the activation of impactpathways and develop and package adapted,partner-specific resource materials.Currently available resources include:• Factsheets on banana disease mitigation andcontrol and good cultural practice (En, Fr, Sw, Kir, Kin)• Videos on best practices for cultivation and diseasemanagement• Recipe books• Radio resources• Website with access to many of the above
  19. 19. How the pathway + channelshapes the impactDirect vs. intermediaries (relatively littleawareness of CIALCA through NGOs andextension)Length of the pathway – possible risk ofmessage „corruption‟ especially with complexinnovations. Higher risk with farmer-farmerdissemination?Intensity: how often is the receiver exposed to aparticular message?
  20. 20. Characteristics of various communicationchannels
  21. 21. Challenges for outscalingsupported by ICT4DDigital divide: the fasted broadband connectionavailable in Burundi is 1/10 the speed of the slowestconnection in Europe, „value‟ (cost x speed) easily1000 times worse.Rural telco reliability can be poor, unreliable networkavailabilityICT4D often focuses too much on hardware andtechnology, whereas the more pressing challenge isinnovative software and content, and a huge capacitygap in using and and exchanging information.Example: For those who are already connected, emailbarely entrenched as communication channel andonline searching and website access low.Language – Still a big challenge. Difficult to supportmore than one languages properly and cost-effectively
  22. 22. Typical geographical distribution of websitevisitors
  23. 23. Effective impact pathways: downstream challenges Level of education Geographical distance and dispersionLiteracy Contact with extensionagent
  24. 24. Challenge: Dealing with increasing knowledgecomplexity More complexity would entail farmer training and facilitation to scale accordingly However not likely not to be linear (probably entailing a shift from single-loop to double-loop learning) But: Triple-S rule of extension messages How to reconcile with (potentially) increasing scientific complexity?
  25. 25. Opportunities: Dealing with increasingknowledge complexityStandard extension models provide adapted solutions toestablished system challenges. It does not (normally)stimulate farmer enquiry, self-discovery or farmerunderstanding and hence learning.We could start explicitly emphasizing experientiallearning with farmers (self and group) and also considerthe „WHY‟ (not just the how!)Caveat: It will take time for extension specialists to„relearn‟ their profession and train in facilitationtechniques, where the objective is to collectively learnrather than to „teach‟.Better identify how our science can augment localknowledge or capacities.Outscaling: Trained communities can serve as knowledgehubs and thus help to out-scale to surrounding villages.
  26. 26. RecommendationsPlanning of impact pathways are absolutely integral toproject design and implementation. They must beembedded and institutionalized ex-ante.We could adopt Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis(PIPA) as a suitable tool. A way of working withstakeholders to determine likely avenues for change.
  27. 27. PIPA
  28. 28. Recommendations IIGoing forward, it would bode well for us to critically reflecton and evaluate where we are, where we have been, andwhere we are goingfrom an RinDperspectiveIn other words: what has worked (and what has not) interms of partnerships, communication, institutionalarrangements and structures, (and science too!)Extract these learning lessons and apply these towards aHumid Tropics CRP with (hopefully) a higher impactpotential.We seem to have some difficulty really comprehendingwhat an „innovation system‟ is, and even moresooperationalizing it.There is an implementation gap. Are we walking the walkor just talking the talk?Willingness to adopt institutional learning, where existingculture and practices can be changedlong-term funding commitment to sustain the learning and
  29. 29. Biting the bulletThere is no silver bullet (or even bronze bullet…)System complexity is a given (people and theirdecisions are inherently complex – and diverse).„We need to embrace complexity‟ and developcoherent approaches for dealing with it. This willtake learning and adaptation on our part!Starting point: work towards betteroperationalisation of AIS and build off existingapproaches such as PLA.

×