Presentation at Rome meeting 2015 (18 Nov. 2015).

1. RTB Flagship 5
Pre-proposal
Way forward
Rome meeting
18 November 2015

2. FP5: AIM

3. FP5 : Grand Challenges

4. FP5 : Impact Pathways

5. Program structure (in pre-proposal)
& ISPC rating
A A A A
C
C

6. Clusters
Annex 5.1 Overview, coding and short titles of FP and clusters
Flagship
Projects:
DISCOVERY DELIVERY
FP1:
Enhanced
genetic resources
FP2:
Productive varieties
& quality seed
FP3:
Resilient crops
FP4:
Nutritious food &
added value
FP5:
Integrated livelihood
systems
Clusters of
Activity:
DI1.1 (Breeding
platform)
DI1.2 (Next
generation
breeding)
DI1.3 (Game
changing traits)
DI1.4 (In-situ
conservation)
DI1.5 (Adding
value to
genebanks)
CC2.1 (Quality seeds
& access to
improved varieties )
BA2.2 (User
preferred banana
cultivars/hybrids)
CA2.3 (Added value
cassava varieties)
PO2.4 (Potato quality
seed)
PO2.5 (Potato
varieties for Asia)
SW2.6 (User
preferred
sweetpotato
varieties)
YA2.7 (Quality seed
yam)
CC3.1 (Pest/disease
management)
CC3.2 (Crop
production systems)
BA3.3 (Banana
fungal diseases/Foc)
BA3.4 (Banana viral
diseases/BBTV)
BA3.5 (Banana
bacterial
diseases/BXW)
CA3.6 (Cassava
biological
constraints,
Asia/Americas)
CA3.7 (Cassava
biological threats,
Africa)
CC4.1 (Postharvest
innovation &
nutrition
improvement)
CA4.2 (Cassava
processing)
CA4.3 (Biofortified
cassava)
SW4.4 (Nutritious
sweetpotato)
CC5.1 (Sustainable
intensification/diversi
fication)
CC5.2 (Institutional
innovations)
PB5.3 (East and
Central Africa)
PB5.4 (West Africa)
PB5.5 (Central
Mekong)
PB5.6 (Tropical
Americas and
Caribbean)
FP 6: Impact at scale
CC6.1 (Knowledge, capacities, partnerships)
CC6.2 (Strategic gender research)
CC6.3 (Foresight, impact assessment)
Cross-cutting
Place based
Cross cutting
Similar
conceptual
framework:
innovation
at scale

7. ISPC: integrated livelihood systems FP5
• Is proposed research of sufficient quality? Other
partners that could play this role
• Geographic clusters labor intensive and site
specific, no clear added value
• Cross-cutting clusters not convincing for IPGs
• Rethink theory of change as a collaborative effort
with all flagship leaders
• How do integrated farm system innovation platforms
work?

8. ISPC: Impact at scale FP6
• Make case for standalone flagship
• Articulate how specific contributions of FP6 respond
to “grand” challenges for scaling
• Get right mix of staff and competencies on board in
a broad area of research and support

9. Merge FP5 and FP6: rationale
• Common conceptual framework in terms of
innovation at scale – innovation system perspective
• Multi-indicator, actors and scales and help design,
test and target innovations within a systems
framework (biophysical + socioeconomic)
• Trigger scaling through scenario analysis and
decision-support
• Both strong gender content, linkages with FP1-4 and
emphasis on enhancing impact
• Space for agronomists, nutritionists, sociologists
and economists across centers to think and engage
with systems thinking

10. Changes in the new merged FP5
• Place based clusters dropped
• Systems dimension linked to site integration
– Eg. Vietnam ++ country: cassava with conservation
ag. with and scaling via linkages processors
• Improved focus IPGs in cross cutting work
• Stronger reciprocal linkages with FP1-FP4
• All flagship project leaders jointly agree theory of
change of FP5
• Conceptual and institutional linkages “livelihood/impact
at scale” FPs in other AFS CRPs
• Reduced W1/2 - better leveraging W3/bilateral
• Saving through consolidation (15%)