Technology adoption and impact pathways for SIMLESA. Shiferaw
Technology Adoption and Impact Pathways for SIMLESA Bekele Shiferaw SIMLESA Session at WCCA 26 Sept, 2011 Brisbane, Australia
Targeted Countries and CropsCountry Targeted Farming systemsEthiopia Maize-com bean system Maize-soybean/com (Melkassa & Awassa) bean systems (Bako - mid-altitude dryland and Pawi) - mid- zone in the Rift Valley attitude sub-humid zone in western EthiopiaKenya Maize-com bean system Maize-com bean/ (western Kenya, p-pea system Kakamega) (central/eastern Kenya, Embu and Mbeere)Tanzania Maize-pigeonpea Maize-Pigeonpea system Northern zone – system Eastern zone Mbulu and Karatu – Kilosa, Mvomero districts districtMalawi Maize + Groundnuts, Maize + pigeonpea Maize + Beans, Maize + (Southern) Soya bean (central)Mozambi Maize-pigeonpea Maize-pigeonpeaque system (Tete- system (Manica- region) Climoio region)
Vision of Success● To increase maize and legume yields by 30% for benefitting farmers – through improved maize and legume varieties and associated management practices, – with adoption enabled and motivated through the development of markets and value chains, from input supplies to output markets.● To reduce downside yield risks by 30% (for downside risk of profits falling below the breakeven point).● To benefit 500,000 farm households within 10 years.
Monitoring and Evaluation● Process monitoring and evaluation – Aims to assess to what extent the project has been implemented as planned and to identify operational and strategic lessons for smooth implementation – Requires careful description and monitoring of activities, milestones and outcomes of the project – Drawing lessons and making timely corrective action to tackle problems and capitalize on new opportunities● Adoption and impact monitoring and evaluation – Aims to measure the project’s success in achieving stated objectives using a counterfactual – Requires measurement of progress using tangible indicators affected by the program and how this differs from the situation without interventions – Extensive data collection using standard instruments
Process monitoring and evaluation● By whom? ● How it is done? – Pro Steering Committee – Annual progress reports (PSC) Monitoring from all partners by the objective – Project Management progress – In-country planning and Committee (PMC) and review meetings – Project Coordinator attainment of: – Annual regional evaluation – Objective coordinators and planning meetings – National coordinators – PMC managerial action – Clearly defined roles – PSC oversight and and responsibilities for Agreed recommendations accountability Activities, – Informal/formal feedback Milestones, from farmers and partners – Performance contracts Outputs, with all partners Outcomes – National M&E teams and ASARECA Logframe and PMS by ASARECA
Adoption and Impact MonitoringAim – Measurement of progress using tangible indicators affected by the program and how this differs from the situation without interventions● By whom? – Lead: Objective 1 – Participate: all other objectives● How? Baseline and adoption studies – Joint visits for site selection – PRA for selecting villages and snapshot of the target areas – Baseline household (and market) surveys – year 1 – Baseline study report – establishes existing conditions for participating and non-participating groups – Adoption surveys (year 4) to monitor changes in selected impact indicators – Estimating adoption and early impact of the project
Feedback process to facilitate adaptive learning and priority setting for impact● Process Adoption, impact Program Evaluation and monitoring and Planning Meetings monitoring and evaluation evaluation PMC, Objective 1 with PSC, PC, NC, OL inputs from Obj 2-5 Greater Efficiency, Accelerated Outcomes and Impact of the Project
Impact Pathway Second order impacts First order impacts Outcomes OutputsActivity
How do we get there? Catalyzing change through the impact pathway SIMLESA Research Outputs Outcomes Impacts Investments Next Final users Adopter-level changes Local, national, regional users (Adopters) Improved knowledge Seed industry and Change inObjective 1 farmer coops Change in total Changes in managementand 4 Government (policies, welfare: regulations, production Income New institutions, Project teams, agencies/ laws) growth and policies, tools Government agencies, departments Change poverty and donors in supply reduction (policy response Change yield makers) and area and Other development marketObjective 2 Management organizations (NGOs, practices and risk prices Change in farmer groups) reducing social Change in innovations conditions: Farmers costs and Indirect profits gender equity, (men and Scaling up economic food security, NARS (Research) and scaling impacts and New germplasm (Incl. private sector) women) out of andObjective 3 (varieties and vulnerability Change in successful multiplier hybrids) profitability innovations effects Breeder seed Seed companies Agrodealers and Change in Change in Change in and foundation attitude, seed agribusinesses gender, economic environmental innovation conditions, conditions: soil income fertility, organic growth matter, agro- NARS (Research) Change in risk ecosystem R&D management health Objective 4 infrastructure (Incl. private sector) and 5 Change in Trained human Government research resources (Ministries, capacity Departments)
Selected Indicators of First and Second order Impacts● Economic impacts – Farmers adopting the new varieties and improved practices – Changes in area of the crop – Changes in yield of the crop – Changes in profits or net income from crops – Changes in marketed surplus of production – Farmers accessing inputs and services – Changes in household food security (consumption) –SO – Changes in total production – SO – Changes in market prices for commodities – SO – …..
Other social benefits and impacts● Social impacts – Changes in risk and vulnerability to shocks -SO – Women farmers participating in PVS and accessing seed, information and other services - SO – Changes in child malnutrition and health - SO – Changes in poverty profiles - SO● Institutional impact (capacity strengthening) – Local capacity building – human capital, institutions, etc - FO – Level of government support and policy changes - SO – Shift in total demand for maize and legumes – SO• Environmental and sustainability impacts – Improvements in soil organic matter, reduction in soil nutrient mining, soil loss, etc
Impact targets (cont.) CA with fert and weed control No of communities No of farmersYear reached reached Adopters 1 38 7,600 2 68 13,680 60 3 123 24,624 180 4 222 44,323 540 5 399 79,782 1,620 6 718 143,607 4,860 7 1,292 258,493 14,580 8 2,326 465,287 43,740 9 4,188 837,517 131,220 10 7,538 1,507,531 393,660
Impact targets by country and year Technology adoption 140,000 120,000 100,000 Ethiopia 80,000 Kenya 60,000 Tanzania 40,000 Malawi 20,000 Moz 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Year
Seed Road Map for Country Y with variety XSeed Road Map 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13Variety in DUS/VCU Trials October, 2010: Provide 36 kg for Trials/DemosVariety Release Meeting October 2011Breeder Seed Production- NARS seed farmsPre-Basic and Basic Seed Production- NARS seed farms- Seed companyCertified Seed Production- NARS seed farms- Seed companyVariety Demonstrations- Research team- MOA- Seed companyVariety Promotion and Marketing 5000 leaflets 10000 leaflets 10000 leaflets- Seed company 10 Field days 20 Field days 20 Field days- Farmer coops
Estimated economic rate of returns from the projectEstimated Impact of the Project r=5% r=10% r=15%Total costs (PV),million USD 2128.15 936.11 458.33Total benefits (PV), million USD 4692.63 1994.89 926.91Net present value(NPV), million USD 2564.48 1058.78 468.58Benefit cost ratio 2.21 2.13 2.02
Outputs and output targets• Outputs are the products of research with a defined time line, contributing to reaching the vision of success by offering solutions to problems identified during the planning process.• Output Targets are the annual deliverables, defined by quantity and type, expected in a specific year and contributing to achieving the Project Outputs. – materials, – policy strategies, – practices, – capacity, and – knowledge.
Output categories● Materials refer to all biological materials and knowledge that adds value to them; not to documents.● Policy strategies refer to analysis and information that is aimed to be used for policy decision making.● Practices include tools, methods and processes that intended for use in research, breeding, policy work, extension, demonstration, and evaluation in the field.● Capacity strengthening includes training and other instruction aimed at enhancing individual capacity, training materials and resources, and interventions that are aimed at enhancing institutional capacity.● Knowledge include knowledge and data that are the deliverable research achievements and do not belong to any of the other categories.
Outcomes and Impact Outcome Outcome is the external use, adoption, or influence of output (s) (e.g. by partners, stakeholders, clients). Impact Impacts are the longer range social, environmental and economic benefits that are consistent with the vision of success for the project or program.