Innovation platform experiences from the
PROGEBE project on in-situ conservation of
endemic ruminant livestock in West Africa
Pamela Pali
ILRI Internal meeting on Innovation Platforms,
Nairobi, 6-7 December 2012

Presentation Outline
• PROGEBE Background
• Expected outcomes
• Key lessons learnt from three innovation
platforms
• Way forward

PROGEBE
• To remove barriers to the in-situ conservation
of priority endemic ruminant livestock (ERL)
species
• N’dama cattle, Djallonke sheep and West
Africa Dwarf goat.
• Gambia, Senegal, Mali, and Guinea in 3
sites/country
• 10 year project began in Q1 2005

PROGEBE Expected Outcomes (1)
• Enhanced productivity pure ERL through
selective breeding and production
improvements to strengthen food security,
increase incomes and enhance incentives for in-
situ conservation
• Incentive schemes to foster optimal
volarization of ERL established, and better
marketing and distribution of products

PROGEBE Expected Outcomes (2)
• Increased share o f ERL breeds in herds of
selected project pilot sites
• Models for community based land use planning
and sustainable natural resource management
to ensure conservation of ERL eco systems
• A system of regional co-operation and
exchanges relevant to ERL

Information exchange
Develop, test and implement models for community-based
conservation, and management approaches, related
strategies for preserving unique genetic trait/habitat
complexes - 2011
PROGEBE intends to develop and implement a sub-regional
system for cooperation, coordination, and information
exchange relevant to endemic livestock.
ILRI has proposed the establishment of innovation
platforms (IPs) at the site and (sub)-national levels as a
mechanism for enhancing communication, co-ordination
and knowledge sharing amongst key actors in PROGEBE.

Process of IP establishment in PROGEBE
Site Establishment
Senegal, Pre establishment process
Bandafassi 1.Training on IP’s and M&E of IP’s
Gambia, 2.Development of guide (ILRI)
Niamina East 3.Development of country TOR’s (NCU) (backstopping meetings)
Establishment process
Guinea, 1.Awareness meetings at site level
Dinguiraye 2.Approval of TOR & financing by RCU
3.Discussions during IP Establishment
a. Project Background, IP awareness
b. Identification of relevant stakeholders
c. IP issues based on the best bet options study
Mali, In addition for Mali…..
Yorobougoula Establishment process
(Madina Diassa) 1.1st meeting: Awareness about IP’s
2.2nd meeting: identification of additional and relevant actors and the
constraint analysis
3.3rd meeting:
a. Identification of other actors relevant to the IP,
b. Discussions with relevant actors,
7
c. ‘institutionalization of the IP’

Background to IP Establishment
• PROGEBE action site: Bandafassi, Senegal
• Established: 26/09/12; 2nd: 24/11/12
• IP focus: : To improve in animal health (Meat production &
productivity)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
• PROGEBE action site: Niamina East, The Gambia
• Established: 24/09/12; 2nd: ??
• IP focus: To increase milk production and marketing
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
• PROGEBE (and MOBIOM) action site: Yorobougoula (Madina
diassa), Mali
• Established:1st meeting: 09/08/2012; 2nd : 16/08/2012; 3rd :
13&14/09/2012
• IP focus: To increase small ruminants, legumes & grain marketing
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
• PROGEBE action site: Dinguiraye, Guinea
• Established: To be established in mid November 2012
• IP Focus: ?? 8

Lessons learned
IP establishment and operationalization
9

Pre IP & IP Establishment
• ‘Difficult’ to conceptualize IP concept (abstract)
• Facilitation to understand concept requires:
– Several (3) awareness meetings with stakeholders
– Which should occur within a short time span
– Require strong and local facilitators (including local
champions/ innovative farmers)
– Considerable time, financial investments
– Could also build capacities of stakeholders first
– Language – several languages (Bambara, French etc)
• Facilitators should have:
– Have conflict management skills
– Have facilitation skills
• Building on existing opportunities is key 10

The Gambia
Site: Niamina east
Milk VC IP focus
Key Issues
1.Disease control
2.Institutional capacity building Other Stakeholders
3.Intensive training of cattle owners on stapling 1.Site Staff (Department of Agriculture)
technologies and feed producers/suppliers on 2.Site based NGOs
alternative source production and management 3.Local radio station
4.Establishment and maintenance of market linkages 4.Local councillors and community leader (s)

Senegal
Site: Bandafassi
Milk VC IP focus

IP issue
 Single meeting is insufficient to discuss
IP issue
 Evidence based:
 Best bet option studies,
 Baseline studies,
 Constraint analysis
 Distinguish difference between the IP
issue and constraints
 Pay attention to the prioritization
process of the issue
13

Constraint analysis
 Evidence based:
 Best bet option studies,
 Baseline studies,
 Constraint analysis
 Need to be validated
 By stakeholders at each subsequent meeting
 Focused
 With each meeting, continuous validation can help
focus the constraints that the IP can deliberate on in
one cycle
14

Stakeholder Analysis
 Stakeholder buy in is critical to:
 Understand their interest & contribution
 Prevent jeopardy (hijacking) of the IP issue
 Continuous validation of stakeholder
composition relevant to the IP issue
 Policy stakeholders are key
 Stakeholder analysis (SNA) is required at
different points in the IP cycle.
15

Institutionalization of IP
In Mali, IP was given a name
Platform for the Promotion of Agriculture and
Livestock "Hope for the Community“
The objective of the IP was to:
Promote the production and marketing of small
ruminants, grains and legumes, with the adoption of
innovations that promote the sustainable integration of
agro-pastoral systems in the community.
Institutionalization is required for recognition
to :
Access formal credit
Access to resources such as funding
If the IP is institutionalized:
So what after the IP issue is resolved?
16

Monitoring and Evaluation of IP
• Allocation of M&E person (SC) for IP activities
(or an M&E committee)
• RCU push: Integrating the IP M&E systems and
the PROGEBE system to prevent dual M&E
systems key
• RCU Push: Demand from RCU to show the ‘value
added’ by the IP and to show consistency of
participation in the IP activities
• Routine M&E (by site co-ordinators) & End of
cycle evaluation (MTE), MTE should occur after
an IP cycle (six months)
• Learning from information and knowledge
transfer and stakeholder interaction 17

Senegal
Site: Bandafassi
Milk VC IP focus

Conclusions
1. Buy in by RCU proved critical to push
the IP establishment – need for
evidence
2. Evidence depends on the NCU + SCU
and how quickly they follow up on
issues and RCU on the financial side
3. Constant dialogue between RCU, NCU
and SCU
19