Science – not novel, limited and lacking depth and technical details

Science issues: scale effects, strategy for prioritization, community involvement, consensus, integration

Some misunderstanding; too academic

How to make operational:

Integration

Bottom-up vs top-down

Involve stakeholders and communities

Matching to on the ground conditions

RMS need to be over-arching; only some project complementarities highlighted

Potential for strengthening:

Bottom up approach – on the ground linking

Need for clarity on hypotheses and research questions

Linkage of innovation platforms and other dimensions (themes) not clear

More needed on linking livelihood with biophysical, modelling, poverty, climate change

Generic and conventional approach - needs to be translated on the ground

Is livelihood framework the most appropriate? Basis?

More required on integration with modelling (including gender) – working group

Integrating models, especially biophysical and socio-economic at appropriate scale(s) is major challenge

Need to apply to identify what works where and why

Clarify underlying assumptions

Issues of scale

Prioritization

Involvement of communities, NGOs

Practical implementation

Need to make this practical:

Incorporating users’ needs;

Consider sequencing;

Scenarios may be useful;

Consider both productivity and NRM;

Need to recognise limitations:

Modelling; concepts of ecosystems and resilience are not the only solutions

Ecosystem services – appreciated, but how to make practical not clear – eg:

Measure on the ground

Link to other components

Need to work this out in practice