This document discusses proposals for the Ethiopia component of the Africa RISING project. It outlines major development challenges in Ethiopia like land degradation and deforestation. Sustainable intensification of mixed agricultural systems is proposed to address these challenges. The objectives of Research Component 2 are to strengthen knowledge exchange groups, establish benchmarks, and identify opportunities to scale innovations. A participatory approach is outlined to characterize farmer knowledge, identify strengths and weaknesses, and design interventions tailored to specific locations. The goal is to build capacity and learn from testing promising options across different farming systems.

1. Proposals for Africa RISING
Ethiopian Highlands Research
Component 2 – Community
level issues and interventions
Aster Gebrekristos (ICRAF)
Africa RISING Ethiopia project implementation meeting, Addis
Ababa, 13-14 February 2013

2. Introduction
Major development
challenges in Ethiopia?
 Land degradation
 low and erratic rainfall
 Deforestation
 Scarcity of fuel wood compels farm
households to burn manure and crop
residues for household energy, decreasing
yields and limiting the supply of animal
feed
 Limited access to external inputs
(fertilizer, seed, pesticides, specialized
machinery and appropriate technologies)

3. Overcoming the challenges
Can sustainable intensification overcome some of the development
challenges? YES!
•Sustainable intensification of mixed tree-crop-livestock systems on
farms and within farming landscapes can reverse land degradation, and
improve crop productivity, livestock feed availability and food security
(Garrity et al., 2010).
 Transform key production systems through sustainable
intensification

4. The challenge
 Fine grained variation in:
 soil (biota)
 climate (altitude)
 farming practices
 household characteristics
 market opportunities
 social capital
 policy and its implementation

5. The requirements
It requires making effective use of a combination of local ecological knowledge, farmer
preferences, market opportunities and science-based understanding of component
interactions
Community mobilization is key for success
It also requires strong partnership (among CG centers, partners...)

7. Main objectives of RC2
RC2 will focus on exploiting the potential for peer-to-peer
knowledge exchange within communities and on
opportunities for strengthening and augmenting existing
practises with external innovation.
The three key deliverables are:
• Bio-physical and socio-economic benchmarks
• Community knowledge exchange groups (CKEGs)
• Opportunities for scaling innovation (endogenous and
exogenous)
Based on the out come of RC1 exsisting functional
CKEGs and/or establish new

8. Research Questions
• What benchmarks are appropriate for meeting the needs of
monitoring progress towards AR-EH / FtF development outcomes at
the household level?
• How can CKEGs be constituted to make the best use of knowledge
that already exists within communities and to act as a platform for the
acquisition and application of new knowledge (intervention options)?
• How can gender equity be properly ensured in the formation and
operation of CKEGs.
• How can communities be organised to capitalise on a range of
opportunities for scaling innovation in ways that are both equitably
targeted and cost effective?

9. Hypotheses
 Based on proper characterisation and stratification (RC1), it is possible to
constructs cost-effective suites of benchmarks that are effective sources of
knowledge for communities, they can underpin meaningful M and E and
do not require exhaustive and expensive household surveys.
 Effective sharing of existing knowledge within communities through CKEGs
can be effective in generating development outcomes before exogenous
innovation is brought into play.
 CKEGs can also form a strong platform for the introduction and integration
of exogenous technologies.
 A balanced analysis of endogenous and exogenous opportunities that
focus on bottom-up integration rather than top-down introduction is a
more effective mechanism for implementing sustainable intensification at
a household level.

10. Approach
Bio-physical and socio-economic benchmarks
Collate all the benchmarking data gathered under RC1 and develop a
suite of benchmarks that addresses the needs of monitoring progress
towards AR-EH / FtF development outcomes.
Develop and test approaches for actively using benchmarks to inform
discussion in CKEGs.
Establish monitoring processes based on the suite of benchmarks
selected.

11. Approach
Community knowledge exchange groups
Establish CKEGs based on equitable gender participation and the
opportunities for knowledge transfer amongst strata.
Develop and test participatory approaches for peer-to-peer
benchmarking as a driver of knowledge transfer.
Develop and test approaches that would allow CKEGs to participate in
driving research priorities for AR-EH.

12. Approach
Opportunities for scaling innovation
Identification of barriers to wider adoption of current practises within
the community.
Identification of solutions for lifting these barriers where feasible.
Identification of entry points for exogenous technologies and
management practices.

13. Approach: Local ecological knowledge
process
 A knowledge based systems approach (The AKT5 software)-
will be employed (Sinclair and Walker, 1998)
 Four stages of the knowledge elicitation process (Dixon et
al., 2001)

14. The process
 Stakeholder analysis (to establish system boundaries and determine the
different strata of people who had an influence on the functioning of the
system e.g farmers, Development Agents, Extension officers and village
leaders etc)
 Scoping, ( different PRA methods will be used such as social mapping and
modelling, seasonality maps, participatory linkage diagrams and focus group
discussions.
 Definition(objectives will be redefined and then semi structured interviews
will be prepared ) Stratified random sampling to select informants of equal
number of male and female
 Compilation phase involved repeated interaction with key
informants, Knowledge representation and evaluation of emerging knowledge
base

15. Participatory resource mapping: integrating trees in fields, farms and
landscapes

16. Participatory resource mapping of the
farming system

17. Compilation and generalisation
• What do farmers know and explain well?
• Drivers and challenges
• Why do farmers do the way they do (e.g positioning of trees on farms)
• Source of exsisting technologies (Endogenous and exogenous)
• processes of change (what works well)- (strong community leader, existing
CKEGs , Model farmers?)
• Identify knowledge gaps and
 Demand driven Intervention options (build on what we have (entry point)
and/or introduce new technologies)

18. Farmers attending a feedback
session
evaluated for coherence and consistency
of the information-Build trust

19. Forms of intervention
Intervention = target practice + associated practices + enabling environment
trees in controlled social capital that enables
crop fields grazing collective grazing
management
trees in other
farm niches Secure user right or
tenure land and tree
quality seed / seedling
supply or encouragement
of FMNR

20. Capacity development
The training team discussing with local
administrators and extension workers of Abreha
We Atsibha village (12th of June, 2012)
• Training for two weeks (class, field ,
interview and feedback) AKT5 local
knowledge acusition
• Capacity building of seven local experts
• One MSc student defended her thesis
ongoing training in Melkassa
Local knowledge training using the AKT5
software and methodology

21. The approach
Characterize variation across scaling domain
 acquire local knowledge
 identify strengths and weaknesses (knowledge gaps)
• Design scaling so that promising options are tested across sufficient
range to refine our understanding of what works where and for
whom
 measure performance of options
 Fit options to sites and farmer circumstances
Establish participatory approach with farmers in which uncertainty and
risk are understood, acknowledged and progressively reduced
 leave to farmers what they do best but
 learn collectively and systematically from experience

22. Contributors
• ICRAF
Dr Aster Gebrekirstos
Dr. Kiros Hadgu
Thank you for your attention!!! Dr Fergus Sinclair
Amesegenaleu! Dr Ermias Aynekulu
Mrs Martha Cronin
• ILRI
• National partners

23. Africa Research in Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation
africa-rising.net