Prepared by: Lead Authors Walter de Boef, Marja Thijssen, Boudy van Schagen, and Tom van Mourik Contributors Tofa Abdullahi, Godwin Atser, Isabelle Baltenweck, Jens-Peter Barnekow Lillesø, Zewdie Bishaw, Elohor Diebiru-Ojo, Carlo Fadda, Alessandra Galie, Sita Ghimire, Lars Graudal, Aynalem Haile, Jon Hellin, Ramni Jamnadas, Alpha Kamara, Karen Marshall, Margaret McEwan, Adamu Molla, Baloua Nebie, Kwame Ogero, Chris Ojiewo, Lucky Omoigui, Michael Peters, Srinivasulu Rajendran, Cristiano Rossignoli, Lateef Sanni, Kelvin Mashisia Shikuku, Reuben Solomon, David Spielman, Abiro Tigabie, and Aboubacar Toure

1. L E A D A U T H O R S :
Walter de Boef
Marja Thijssen
Boudy van Schagen
Tom van Mourik
C O N T R I B U T I O N S :
Impact of CGIAR seed system
development programs:
Assessment against
the One CGIAR
Theory of Change
February 2022
Tofa Abdullahi
Godwin Atser
Isabelle Baltenweck
Jens-Peter Barnekow Lillesø
Zewdie Bishaw
Elohor Diebiru-Ojo
Carlo Fadda
Alessandra Galie
Sita Ghimire
Lars Graudal
Aynalem Haile
Jon Hellin
Ramni Jamnadas
Alpha Kamara
Karen Marshall
Margaret McEwan
Adamu Molla
Baloua Nebie
Kwame Ogero
Chris Ojiewo
Lucky Omoigui
Michael Peters
Srinivasulu Rajendran
Cristiano Rossignoli
Lateef Sanni
Kelvin Mashisia Shikuku
Reuben Solomon
David Spielman
Abiro Tigabie
Aboubacar Toure

2. E X E C U T I V E
S U M M A R Y
2

3. Introduction
3
In the context of the CGIAR Community of
Excellence for Seed Systems Development, we
assessed CGIAR seed systems development
programs against the One CGIAR Theory of
Change (ToC).
• Select a set of diverse case studies covering seed system
development programs on food crops, trees, forages,
livestock and fish;
• Lead program staff through an assessment framework
looking at:
• Embedding of interventions in the One CGIAR action
areas;
• Program contributions to One CGIAR impact areas and
associated indicators;
• Innovation pathways;
• Achievements at spheres of control, influence and interest;
• Accomplishments measured against scales for readiness
and use.
• Visualize case study assessment results in figures;
• Address in a synthesis:
• Commonalities and variations;
• Individual and collective alignment with the ToC;
• Contributions to One CGIAR ambitions;
• Design considerations for future seed system development
initiatives.
Assessment approach
One CGIAR Theory of Change

4. Results and conclusions
4
• Seed system activities are embedded in all three One CGIAR
action areas of Genetic innovation, Resilient agrifood systems
and Systems transformation;
• Emphasis of action areas largely depends on the primary seed
system, i.e. being formal, intermediary and/or informal;
• And depends on the prevalence of primary stakeholders
responsible for seed supply, i.e. degree in which they operate in
the private, public or farmers’ domain;
• Most seed programs show impact in all five impact areas of the
One CGIAR ToC;
• The degree by which commodities contribute to food security,
nutrition and/or income, define prioritization among the impact
areas;
• Seed system programs use a mix of the innovation pathways of
Scientific innovation, Targeted capacity development, and
Innovation in policy;
• Activities go along the whole scale from low readiness to high
use;
• They are in the sphere of control (still within the operational
environment of the program), sphere of influence (determined by
relationships and interactions), and sphere of interest (reported
to contribute to the long-term envisaged change);
• The consolidation stage of the activities, partnerships and
programs, determines how much programs have currently been
able to contribute to seed system transformation and long-lasting
change;
• The assessments and synthesis provide illustrations of how
functional seed systems are critical for One CGIAR innovations
to reach the end users;
• They give direction to design teams for developing seed systems
initiatives with maximum contribution to One CGIAR interests
and impact areas;
• They illustrate the vital role of partnerships in seed systems for
reaching impact, and call for partners’ influence in the design of
seed system programs;
• It is important to move to a more defined role of seed system
programs in the One CGIAR to delineate the role of One CGIAR
seed system experts and the way they interact and operate in
partnerships;
• The collective of seed system experts are critical in determining
which activities are within the mandate of One CGIAR, for which
activities partnerships are needed, and how those partnerships
need to be shaped to be most impactful.

5. I N T R O D U C T I O N
5

6. One CGIAR Theory
of Change1
6
1: Source: Adapted from Draft CGIAR Performance and Results
Management Framework 2022-2030 (16 October 2020)

7. One CGIAR Theory of Change (ToC)
7
• The One CGIAR ToC2 focuses on five impact areas which are closely linked to the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs): (i) Nutrition, health & food security; (ii) Poverty reduction,
livelihoods & jobs; (iii) Gender equality, youth & social inclusion; (iv) Climate adaptation &
mitigation; and (v) Environmental health & biodiversity;
• Common impact indicators have been identified for each of the five impact areas, allowing
measurement of contribution to collective targets for transformation of food, land and water
systems at local, regional and global levels; the common indicators can be complemented with
program specific indicators;
• The One CGIAR ToC looks at three main pathways through which impact is achieved;
pathways are innovations systems for: (i) Science-based innovations; (ii) Targeted capacity
development; and (iii) Innovations in policy;
• Planning and progress of innovation pathways is mapped against spheres of control, influence
and interest of the CGIAR;
• Activities take place in three domains: (i) Genetic innovation; (ii) Resilient agrifood systems,
and (iii) Systems transformation.
2: Source: Draft CGIAR Performance and Results Management Framework 2022-2030 (16 October 2020). Note that during the implementation of the study some
terminology slightly changed, for example, the names of the three action areas. We use the terminology as currently communicated through the CGIAR website.

8. One CGIAR ToC & Seed Systems Development
8
• In the context of the CGIAR Community of Excellence (CoE) for Seed Systems
Development3, we assessed selected/representative CGIAR seed systems
development programs against the One CGIAR ToC and asked:
• How do current seed systems development programs contribute to the one
CGIAR impact areas; and through which indicators?
• Through which innovation pathways is this impact mainly achieved?
• How can achievements at innovation pathways be mapped against spheres of
control, influence and interest and in a more practical manner measured
against scales for readiness and use?
• Looking at the interventions itself, how are they embedded in the one CGIAR
action areas?
3: Find more information on the Community of Excellence at this website: https://pim.cgiar.org/cgiar-coe-seed-systems-development/

9. Objectives of the assessment
9
The assessments and synthesis show:
• What are commonalities and variations among different seed system
development programs in the CGIAR?
• How are the individual and collective seed system development programs
aligned with the One CGIAR ToC today?
• How do current seed systems programs within CGIAR match with the One
CGIAR vision and ambitions?
• What are considerations and implications?
The assessment results and the synthesis support the design of future seed
system development initiatives under the One CGIAR umbrella.

10. M E T H O D O L O G Y
10

11. Study approach
11
• Establish a small facilitation team with experts from Wageningen Centre for
Development Innovation (WCDI)4 and the Royal Tropical Institute (KIT) to develop the
assessment framework;
• Select a set of case studies which reflect diversity of:
• Commodity, including food crops, trees, forages, livestock and fish;
• Reproduction systems;
• Agro-ecological, socio-economic and policy contexts;
• Geographies;
• Paradigms/models to seed systems development;
• Implementing CGIAR institutes.
• Facilitators to guide the program manager and selected colleagues/partners through
the steps of the framework assessing the design and performance of the seed system
development program against the One CGIAR ToC;
• Share assessment results with the resource team for verification and completion;
4: WCDI is part of Wageningen University & Research

12. Study approach
12
• Process in a graphic manner the outcomes of the individual case study
assessments;
• Pull results together in one overview and compile a synthesis covering the
following points:
• Identify commonalities and variations;
• Explore individual and collective alignment with the ToC;
• Describe seed system programs’ contributions to One CGIAR ambitions;
• Define considerations for future seed system development initiatives.

13. Case studies
13
No. Seed system Geography Institute
1. Maize Nigeria IITA
2. Rice India IRRI
3. Sorghum Mali ICRISAT
4. Legumes Ethiopia ICARDA & ARARI
5. Cassava Nigeria IITA
6. Sweetpotato Tanzania CIP, CGIAR Research Program on RTBs
7. Bean and wheat landraces Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT
8. Brachiaria Eastern and Southern Africa ILRI & Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT
9. Trees Ethiopia ICRAF & University of Copenhagen
10. Small ruminants Ethiopia, Tunisia, Tanzania and Sudan ILRI & ICARDA
11. Tilapia Bangladesh WorldFish

14. Steps in the seed system assessment framework5
14
5: Find the assessment framework and scoring
tables in Annex 2

15. Steps in the seed system assessment framework
15
1. Characteristics:
• Describe the main characteristics of the seed
system.
2. Action areas:
• Describe activities within the 3 action areas
(Genetic innovation, Resilient agrifood systems,
Systems transformation);
• Score relative importance of the action areas;
provide justification.
3. Impact areas and targets:
• Score relative importance of the 5 impact areas
considering the prescribed impact targets;
• Indicate contribution to common impact indicators
per impact area;
• Score relative importance of the impact indicators.
4. Innovation pathways and spheres of control,
influence and interest:
• Based on a brief description of the 3 innovation
pathways (Science-based innovations, Targeted
capacity development, Innovation in policy), score
relative importance of the pathway;
• Provide 3 examples of interventions within each of
the 3 innovation pathways;
• Score progress of the innovation or capacity
development on a scale for readiness and use;
• Provide relative score on how each innovation or
capacity development intervention has progressed
against the spheres of control, influence and
interest.
5. Final observations:
• Share any final questions and observations.

16. R E S U LT S A N D
D I S C U S S I O N
16

17. Embedding of activities of seed system programs in
One CGIAR action areas6
17
6: Find a description of the three action areas in Annex 2; find case study summaries in Annex 1

18. Embedding of activities of seed system programs in
One CGIAR action areas
18
• All assessed seed system programs have interventions in the three actions areas of Genetic innovation,
Resilient agrifood systems, and Systems transformation;
• The commonly used assumption that Genetic innovation is the main and sole action area and driver of seed
systems programs is not valid;
• In cases where Genetic innovation is the main action area (maize, rice, sorghum, trees, tilapia), interventions in
Systems transformation are generally less prominent (except for trees), assuming the presence of a vibrant and
commercial seed sector;
• Next to Genetic innovation, the assessed seed system programs are active in the area of Resilient agrifood
systems, and focus on the use of seed and genetic materials;
• The seed system programs in which the emphasis is on Resilient agrifood systems (legumes, cassava,
landraces, Brachiaria, small ruminants), focus more on community-based and less on seed company-based
(private) seed production and supply, however, in the case of Brachiaria the private sector is becoming more
and more involved;
• All seed system programs indicate activities in the area of Systems transformation, with highest prominence for
the vegetatively propagated crops (sweetpotato, cassava, but also trees), indicating the need to address
system change.

19. Contribution of seed system programs to the One CGIAR
impact areas7
19
7: Find a description of the impact areas and impact indicators in Annex 2; find case study summaries in Annex 1

20. Contribution of seed system programs to the One CGIAR
impact areas
20
• Ten out of the 11 assessed seed system programs indicate a contribution to all five One
CGIAR impact areas;
• Staple grain seed system programs (maize, rice, sorghum, including landraces) focus on
Nutrition, health & food security as the main area of impact;
• The main target for the maize, rice and sorghum seed system programs is to reach people with
relevant CGIAR innovations;
• The rice and landraces seed system programs also prioritize Environmental health &
biodiversity, targeting a diversity of indicators under this impact area;
• Seed system programs on smallholder farmer commodities/less commercial crops (legumes,
cassava, sweetpotato and small ruminants) focus on Nutrition, health & food security; Poverty
reduction, livelihoods and jobs; and Gender equality, youth and social inclusion;
• Whereas reaching people with relevant CGIAR innovations is an important indicator for these
programs, for seed system programs on legumes and small ruminants also meeting minimum
dietary energy requirements is given emphasis;

21. Contribution of seed system programs to the One CGIAR
impact areas
21
• Most seed system programs focus more on reaching women and less on reaching
youth;
• Seed system programs on cash generating commodities (tilapia, Brachiaria) prioritize
the impact area Poverty reduction, livelihoods & jobs, targeting to reach people with
CCIAR innovations to assist them to exit poverty;
• The tree seed system program with its landscape and biodiversity focus aims for
impact in the areas of Climate adaptation & mitigation; and Environmental health and
biodiversity, addressing a range of indicators across these two impact areas;
• Whereas in trees and maize seed system programs the impact area of Climate
adaptation & mitigation is among the two given highest emphasis, other seed
programs prioritize the other impact areas, however, not denying the importance of
this impact area.

22. Use of One CGIAR innovation pathways by seed system
programs in reaching impact8
22
8: Find a description of innovation pathways in Annex 2; find case study summaries in Annex 1

23. Use of One CGIAR innovation pathways by seed system
programs in reaching impact
23
• All seed system development programs use the three pathways of scientific
innovation, targeted capacity development, and innovation in policy to achieve impact;
• The seed system programs on maize, sorghum, legumes, landraces and Brachiaria
emphasize the pathway of scientific innovations, with development of new varieties
and breeds, but also innovations on business models for early generation seed
production, quality seed multiplication, improved management practices, etc.;
• These seed system programs illustrate that scientific innovation goes beyond genetic
innovation;
• The seed system programs on rice, cassava, trees, small ruminants use capacity
development for various stakeholders, ranging from farmers to researchers to policy
makers as the main pathway to reach impact;
• The seed system programs on sweetpotato and tilapia use all three innovation
pathways equally.

24. Measuring progress against scales of readiness and use9
24
9: Find a description of scales of readiness and use for innovation pathways in Annex 2; find case study summaries in Annex 1
Illustrative
examples

25. Measuring progress against scales of readiness and use
25
• The seed system programs of the selected case studies on food crops show examples of
innovations covering the whole spectrum from low readiness to high use;
• Variations in readiness and use are seed system and program context specific;
• The rice, sorghum, sweetpotato and landraces seed system programs show scientific innovations
at medium to high use level, meaning that innovations are used by organisations, networks and end
users;
• For the sorghum and tree seed system programs we also see examples of scientific innovations at
low readiness to low use level, showing that the program is still in control of those innovations;
• All seed system programs show examples of capacity development at medium to high use level,
meaning that programs have been successful in ensuring application by organisations, networks
and end users;
• The rice, sorghum and sweetpotato program also provide examples in which capacity development
has started but application is not observed yet (medium to high readiness);
• Where the policy innovation examples in the sorghum seed system program are at the policy
research and analysis stage (low readiness), the rice, sweetpotato and tilapia seed system
programs provide examples of policy innovations which have achieved the expected impact (high
use).

26. Mapping progress against spheres of control, influence
and interest10
26
10: Find an explanation of spheres of control, influence and interest in Annex 2; find case study summaries in Annex 1
Illustrative
examples

27. Mapping progress against spheres of control, influence
and interest
27
Illustrative
examples

28. Mapping progress against spheres of control, influence
and interest
28
• The case studies provide examples of Science-based innovations, Targeted capacity
development, and Innovation in policies at all three spheres of control, influence and
interest;
• Variations in progress measured against scales of control, influence and interest are
seed system and program context specific;
• The seed system programs of food crops and tilapia show examples of activities in the
spheres of control, influence and interest;
• For small ruminants, most of the seed system activities analyzed are in the spheres of
influence and interest, indicating that those innovations are in the hands of partners
and end users;
• For the tree seed system program, the activities analyzed are still more in the sphere
of control and influence, showing that the program itself is mainly driving the activities.

29. C O N C L U S I O N S
29

30. Conclusions – assessments and synthesis
30
• The case studies of selected seed system programs highlight a variety of CGIAR supported seed
system innovations and outputs, outcomes and impacts achieved over the last decade;
• We realize that the case studies are just a selection of the rich experience of CGIAR contributing to
seed system development of many commodities in many countries and regions;
• The collection of case studies illustrate a diversity of seed systems and diversity in context which
led to different choices in program design;
• As a collection of seed system programs, they show that activities are embedded in all three One
CGIAR action areas of Genetic innovation, Resilient agrifood systems and Systems transformation;
• Emphasis of action areas largely depends on two seed system characteristics: (i) the prevalence of
primary stakeholders responsible for seed supply, i.e. degree in which they operate in the private,
public or farmers’ domain; and (ii) the primary seed system, i.e. being formal, intermediary and/or
informal;
• Current seed system programs show impact in all five impact areas of the One CGIAR ToC;
• The type of commodities (food security, nutrition, income) define prioritization among the impact
areas;

31. Conclusions – assessments and synthesis
31
• All case studies use a mix of the innovation pathways of Scientific innovation,
Targeted capacity development, and Innovation in policy, which is needed to achieve
seed system transformation and to achieve impact;
• In relation to progress measured against scales of readiness and use, the case
studies provide illustrative examples along the whole scale from low readiness
(discovery, tools developed, research implemented) to high use (uptake and
application by end user, envisaged impact achieved);
• The examples of activities mapped along the sphere of control remain within the
operational environment of the program; those that are in the sphere of interest, are
determined by relationships and interactions; and those in the sphere of interest, are
reported to contribute to the long-term envisaged change;
• The case studies differ in the level of consolidation of activities, partnerships and
programs, which determines how much programs have currently been able to
contribute to seed system transformation and long-lasting change.

32. Conclusions – future design
32
• The assessments and synthesis are supportive to the design process of new seed related initiatives
and investments under the umbrella of One CGIAR;
• They give direction to design teams for developing seed systems initiatives with maximum
contribution to One CGIAR interests and impact areas;
• The assessments and synthesis provide illustrations of how functional seed system are critical for
One CGIAR innovations to reach the end users;
• The assessments and synthesis illustrate the vital role of partnerships in seed systems for
achieving impact;
• They call for partnerships’ influence in the design of seed system programs; co-design is a pre-
requisite for impact;
• It is important to move to a more defined role of seed system programs in the One CGIAR to
delineate the role of One CGIAR seed system experts and the way they interact and operate in
partnerships;
• The collective of seed system experts are critical in determining which activities are within the
mandate of one CGIAR, for which activities partnerships are needed, and how those partnerships
need to be shaped to be most impactful.

33. Authors and institutional affiliations
33
Synthesis report
• Walter de Boef & Marja Thijssen, Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation;
Boudy van Schagen & Tom van Mourik, Royal Tropical Institute
• Maize: Lucky Omoigui, Alpha Kamara, Reuben Solomon, Tofa
Abdullahi, IITA
• Rice: Jon Hellin, IRRI
• Sorghum: Chris Ojiewo, CIMMYT11; Aboubacar Toure & Baloua
Nebie, ICRISAT
• Legumes: Zewdie Bishaw, Abiro Tigabie, ICARDA; & Adamu
Molla, Amhara Regional Agricultural Research Institute
• Cassava: Lateef Sanni, Godwin Atser & Elohor Diebiru-Ojo, IITA
• Sweetpotato: Margaret McEwan, Kwame Ogero & Srinivasulu
Rajendran, CIP, CGIAR Research Program on RTBs
• Landraces: Carlo Fadda, Alliance of Bioversity International
and CIAT
• Brachiaria: Isabelle Baltenweck, Sita Ghimire, ILRI; & Michael
Peters, Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT
• Trees: Ramni Jamnadas, Lars Graudal, ICRAF; & Jens-Peter
Barnekow Lillesø, University of Copenhagen
• Small ruminants: Alessandra Galie, Karen Marshal, ILRI; &
Aynalem Haile, ICARDA
• Tilapia: Cristiano Rossignoli, WorldFish & Kelvin Mashisia
Shikuku, ILRI12
• General: David Spielman, IFPRI
Seed system program case studies and general contributions
11: Case study from ICRISAT; author recently moved to CIMMYT.
12: Case study from WorldFIsh; author recently moved to ILRI.