crp 1.1 dryland systems : impact pathways for east and southern africa
TRANSCRIPT
CRP 1.1 Dryland Systems
Impact Pathways for East and Southern Africa
DRAFT – 27 March 2013
ContentsContents......................................................................................................................................1
Fig. 1: Draft Framework for CRP 1.1 Impact Pathways.......................................................2Table 1: Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2...............................................................................3Table 2: Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3.............................................................................11Table 3: Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3, Satellite Sites......................................................16
This document is an attempt to present the impact pathways as envisioned in the inception reports for the SRT 2 and SRT 3 sites for East and Southern Africa. Figure 1 is a framework that attempts to be broad enough to include all of the impact pathways envisioned last year at inception stage for East and Southern Africa and South Asia. Please note, because of the origin of these impact pathways, impact pathways relating to SRT 1 and SRT 4 are lacking.
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 1
Fig. 1: Draft Framework for CRP 1.1 Impact Pathways
Research, Knowledge and Methodology Outputs
First Order Outcomes:Governance, Policy and
Program Changes
Second Order Outcomes: Changed Farmer/
Pastoralist Practices
Third Order Outcomes:System Changes
Household Level
OutcomesImpacts
A1. Research findings on technical improvements
A2. Research findings & analysis aimed at understanding of resources and of social, economic and ecological systems
A3. Research findings and analysis aimed at improved household characterization
A4. Examples and models for programming
A5. Tools, approaches, models and capacity development for governance, policy and planning
A6. Proactive knowledge management:• tools, approaches and models• capacity development• lobbying and information
sharing
B1. Better governance processes
B2. Better policies
B3. More and better investment in drylands
B4. Better land and resource planning and management
B5. Financial services
B6. Market development:• Market systems• Capacity development• Market infrastructure
B7. Livestock, agricultural rangeland and social programming
B8. Better research
C1. Livestock-crop integration
C2. Better feed and herd management
C3. Water harvesting
C4. Land and soil management
C5. Better use of and access to information
C6. Adoption of innovations
C7. Increased farmer/ pastoralists capacity
Agroecological improvements D1. Increased productivity D2. Improved sustainabilityo Increased biomasso Agrobiodiversity
Socio-economic outcomes D3. Tenure security D4. Reduced conflict D5. Access to/participation
in markets D6. Access to credit/ micro-
finance D7. Landholding size D8. Greater equity
E1. Livelihood
assets
E2. Livelihood strategies
E3. Income
RV.
Reduced Vulnerability
SI.
Sustainable Intensification
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 2
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2
Table 1: Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2Problem Component/Outcome Output B1 to B8 (esp. B2-B4)(1) Although the multiple
drivers of vulnerability of dryland commun-ities are well docu-mented, attempts to reduce it are under-mined by a limited understanding of how many people are vulnerable, and to what extent, in different dryland populations (urban:rural, NRM:non-NRM based, aridity zones)
A51.1.1 Nationally / widely agreed frameworks to define and measure vulnerability are in place and integrated into existing government / development partners household classification and monitoring systems
A2/A31.1.1.1 Widely accepted and contextually specific definitions of
vulnerability (and resilience) exist for communities and households in the target site
A51.1.1.2 Government approved monitoring frameworks in place to
monitor levels of vulnerability / resilienceA2/A31.1.1.3 Vulnerability/ resilience of dryland populations being mapped
and classified according to agreed indicators in frameworkA51.2.1 Vulnerability framework being used to model impact of long and short term variables (drivers) and inform policy and programming interventions
A51.2.1.1 Framework used to create/ enhance modelling systems that can
predict long and short term shifts in vulnerability /resilience based on multiple variables.
A51.2.1.2 Vulnerability / resilience modelling integrated into government
MIS/ EW / M&E systems
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 3
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2
Problem Component/Outcome Output B1 to B3(2) Low political will to
develop drylands and ineffective governance systems result in increased vulnerability
B1/B2/B42.1.1 Improved multi-sectoral (government) NRM plans (national and local) are developed, implemented and enforced
A4/A52.1.1.1 Validated model for local level NRM governance established
and disseminatedA52.1.1.2 Model used to develop govt standards and guidelines A52.1.1.3 Capacity built / support given to develop quality plans in all
areas B42.1.1.4 # plans developed using guidance
D32.2. Insecure land rights, weak strategic and land use planning are increas-ingly undermining the productivity and envi-ronment of the drylands
B42.2.1 The quality of local strategic and land use plans and applica-tion is improved processes are improved by being more holistic and participatory
A4/A52.2.1.1 Effective models for participatory planning processes are
identified and inform practiceB42.2.1.2 Quality local strategic plans developed following effective
participatory processes B42.2.1.3 Quality land use plans in place developed in full consultation
with all parties B12.2.1.4 Representative and participatory governance structures in place
to monitoring the Implementation of local plansB3 D12.3.1 Sufficient and appropriate investment secured for basic services and infrastructure directly boosting pastoral (and non) productivity
A62.3.1.1 Evidence for lobbying produced linking poor productivity with
gap in infrastructural / basic services investmentA2/A42.3.1.2 Models/ research exists to assess the benefits of large scale
investment in infrastructure / basic services A42.3.1.3 Model uses to assess the relative benefits of different
investments in different dryland contexts to secure investment
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 4
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2
Problem Component/Outcome Output D1(3): Despite strong growth in demand for livestock in both domestic and international markets, the productivity of many (most) smaller pastoralists in the drylands is declining resulting increasing poverty and vulnerability
D53.1.1 Smaller pastoralists access and integration into national livestock markets is increased
A23.1.1.1 Systems in place for tracking utilisation of livestock markets by size of
producer B63.1.1.2 Livestock market infrastructure and operation improved in remote areasA4 B6/C73.1.1.3 Effective interventions for increasing business acumen of small
pastoralists and achieving better prices through joint ventures etc scaled upA63.1.1.4 Expanded price information networks using new and existing technologies
D13.2.1 Smaller pastoralists improve their productivity (not necessarily herd size) increasing incomes and resilience
B73.2.1.1 Effective systems for comprehensive provision of quality animal health
care in place B73.2.1.2 Expanded systems to ensure year round access to feed and fodder B73.2.1.3 Expanded access to year round (drought resistant) watering points B13.2.1.4 Access to credit as required
C53.3.1 Dryland technicians and pastoralists have improved access to quality technical advice and support
B43.3.1.1 Best practice incorporated into government rangeland/ NR management B73.3.1.2 Expanded numbers of livestock / pastoral outreach workers B73.3.1.3 Improved access to consistent quality technical advice on enhancing local
breeds and production methods B13.3.1.4 Improved regulation and monitoring of animal health care services
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 5
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2
Problem Component/Outcome Output D1(4) The productivity of smaller pastoralists is further undermined by a lack of investment in the production of, or commercial markets for, other livestock related products, particularly milk but also other dairy products, fodder and forage
D14.1.1 Small holder commercial milk (and other dairy) production/sales/ income in the dry lands is increased
A54.1.1.1 Systems in place to monitor dryland milk / dairy production
(and sale)D14.1.1.2 Increased milk production for saleD14.1.1.3 Improvements in milk quality D54.1.1.4 Expanded number of commercial milk processing enterprises D1/D64.1.1.5 Expanded milk supply to markets out of drylands
D84.2 Milk production in the dry-lands is primarily managed by women and is a key element of child nutrition. How can women continue to control and benefit from the commercialisation of the milk industry without any negative impacts on child nutrition?
D1 or D54.2.1 Investment in commercialisation are gender and nutrition sensitive OR Increased milk sales result in increased incomes for women in the drylands
A2/A34.2.1.1 Gender assessment undertaken to ensure commercialisation of
milk markets is gender sensitive and pro-nutritionB3/B64.2.1.2 Subsidies provided to enable women to expand and realise the
income generating potential of milk production
D1 E34.3.1 Fodder and forage production and incomes sustainably expanded by vulnerable groups in the drylands
A44.3.1.1 Pro-poor models of community managed fodder and forage
production enterprises identified and disseminated A24.3.1.2 Fodder and forage production capabilities of different dryland
habitats assessed and mapped A14.3.1.3 Improved fodder and forage seeds and species identified
B34.3.1.4 Government / donors invest resources to expand best practice
models and approaches
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 6
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2
Problem Component/Outcome Output D2(5): Growing populations in the drylands depend on non-pastoral economic activities that do not generate sufficient returns, are environmentally unsustainable and can undermine pastoral production systems
B1/B45.1.1 Standard cost – benefit- environmental assessments undertaken by government and donor agencies before funding alternative / diversified livelihood programmes
B1/B45.1.1.1 Improved and institutionalised environmental assessments of
new investment options A55.1.1.2 Validated tool for ecosystem-scale impact assessment that
accounts for impacts on pastoral landscape managementA55.1.1.3 Validated tools for evaluating community-level food-security
impact of public investments A65.1.1.4 Monitoring system established to track long-term economic and
other impactsB1/B45.2.1 All irrigation schemes are subject to an approval process that ensures compliance with local level NRM plans
A1/A45.2.1.1 Standard guidelines in place and utilised to promote models of
irrigated agriculture that do not impact negatively on the wider drylands environment
A1/A65.2.1.2 Information on irrigation options are available to communities
and government planners at all levels (e.g. good practice guidelines/minimum standards)
B25.2.1.3 Recognition in government policies and plans that pastoralism
should remain principle agricultural system in the dry lands.
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 7
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2
Problem Component/Outcome Output D4/RV(6). High levels of conflict among three ethnic groups who compete for resources leads to high levels of vulnerability
B46.1.1 Improved management of existing natural resources
B46.1.1.1 Improved rangeland and upland forest management strategies B46.1.1.2 Improved water harvesting and management
D26.1.2 Enhanced natural resources base, including biodiversity
D26.1.2.1 Restored land D1/D26.1.2.2 Reduced erosion and improved soil health
B46.2 Immobility leading to inability to access resources and to over-use of resources
B4/D36.2.1 Improved land tenure, use and ownership systems
A26.2.1.1 Understanding of community-based land use, tenure and
demarcation systems B16.2.1.2 Community-based demarcation of land recognized and
sanctioned by government authorities ?6.3 Poorly defined and changing administrative, electoral and ethnic boundaries
B2/B46.3.1 Adoption of improved NRM and land management policies
A66.3.1.1 Improved linkages and information exchange between
administrative and community levels covering land use, conflict resolution, coordination and development efforts
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 8
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2
Problem Component/Outcome Output D2/D4(7) Severe land degradation leads to increased vulnerability, food insecurity, conflict and poverty
D27.1 Severe pressure on natural resources due to increased numbers of people and animals
C1/C2/C47.1.1 Improved land and livestock management practices and diversification of income generating opportunities
B47.1.1.1 Improved rangeland and upland forest management strategies B47.1.1.2 Improved water harvesting and management A17.1.1.3 Defined options for income generation on and off farm and for
women in particular B77.1.1.4 Improved access to reproductive health care for women
D17.2.1 Increased productivity and profitability per unit of resource
B4/C27.2.1.1 Better, all year, fodder availability and management C2/C47.2.1.2 Managed spontaneous regeneration C2/C47.2.1.3 Controlling invasive species C27.2.1.4 Rotational grazing and other improved practices adopted D57.2.1.5 Improved livestock value chain
D37.3 Inappropriate and ill-defined land tenure policies and practices
B27.3.1 Appropriate policies defined, implemented and adopted
A57.3.1.1 Institutional framework to analyze the current situation,
prepare a reform strategy and plan and implement change.
B27.4.1 Strategies that are adapted to the dynamics of change
A47.4.1.1 Multiple community based strategy options defined and
developedB2/B77.5.2.1 Administrative support of good practices in land restoration,
combatting erosion, conservation and reforestation
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 9
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 2
Problem Component/Outcome Output D1/E3(8). Dryland ‘on-farm’ production, profitability and income generation do not reach their maximum potential
D1/D38.1.1 Improved yields and incomes
A1/C28.1.1.1 Improved breed and livestock management
C68.1.2 Profitable and diverse income generating opportunities for communities, groups, men and women realized
A18.1.2.1 Diverse income generating opportunities tried and testedA48.1.2.2 Optimal utilization and management strategies developed
D38.2 People’s access to productive natural resources are defined under legally pluralistic regimes, so rights to access are not commonly defined
A2/A68.2.1 Better understanding among communities and local authorities of how resource access is defined and controlled
A2/A68.2.1.1 Surveys and maps of legal and extra-legal definitions of rights
of access to land
B78.4.1 Improved community-based methods of controlling and managing Prosopis and Opuntia spp
A18.4.1.1 Technologies for controlling Prosopis and Oputia spp A18.4.1.2 Technologies for managing Prosopis spp including for high
quality charcoal production and for timber production C1(9). Poor livestock-crop integration
C69.1.1 Enhanced access to and uptake of key inputs such as seeds and fertilizer
A1/B79.1.1.1 Improved technologies and inputs developed and made
availableC19.1.2 Enhanced diversity of crops and forage plants
A69.1.2.1 Diverse crops and information about their cultivation, storage,
and marketing is made availableC1/C49.2.3 Farmers implement sustainable agronomic practices, including rotation, irrigation, soil fertility measures, and erosion control
A69.2.3.1 Information on appropriate technologies and interventions is
made available
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 10
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3
Table 2: Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3Problem Component/Outcome Output
E11. Physical access to resources
D61.1.1 Farmers make use of better cash/credit availability
B51.1.1.1 Mechanisms developed to enable farmers to access credit
B81.1.2 Researchers understand, and give appropriate weight to, the role of household resource endowments in determining sustainable intensification opportunities
A31.1.1.2 Household constraints on, and potential for, sustainable
intensification characterized.
A21.1.1.3 Resource gaps quantified
A1/A41.1.1.4 Sustainable Intensification programs for household categories
developed
C4 1.3 Farmers manage their natural resources in a more sustainable ways
A21.3.1 Soil, land and water characteristics determined
A21.3.2 Input requirements for a sustainability threshold determined
A61.3.3 Information on Sustainable Natural Resource Management available
C6 D11.4 Farmers use additional resources, e.g. irrigation, improved varieties, sustainably to increase productivity and profitability.
A1/A21.4.1 Irrigation potential, e.g. water resources, topography identified
A1/A41.4.2 Sustainable irrigation systems identified, tested and promoted
C11.5 Farmers use resources more efficiently, e.g. better crop-livestock integration.
A11.5.1 Appropriate options for better crop-livestock integration developed
A51.5.5 DSS and Trade-off analysis tools developed and deployed
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 11
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3
Problem Component/Outcome Output
E1 (E3?)2. Inputs and outputs for sustainable intensification
D52.1.1 Farmers participate more in input and output markets.
A2/A32.1.1.1 Constraints to farmer participation in markets identified.
B62.1.1.2 Potential buyers and input suppliers identified and linked to farmers.
A4/B5/B62.1.1.3 External solutions for overcoming constraints identified and
delivered, e.g. subsidies, small packs, micro-finance.
A42.1.1.4 Local institutional mechanisms for enhancing market participation
identified and tested, e.g. group buying and selling.
A62.1.1.5 Effective mechanisms for accessing and using price-, quality- and
quantity information by farmers and buyers identified.
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 12
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3
Problem Component/Outcome Output
B23.Policies and institutions
B2B63.1.1 Policymakers influence market development to support SI.
A53.1.1.1 Policies and instruments with beneficial effects on markets
identified.
A63.1.1.2 Communication channels between policymakers and researchers
improved.
A6 B63.1.1.3 Awareness of policies and their implications among market actors
improved
B2 C53.1.2 Policymakers develop and implement policies that support/promote technology transfer.
A53.2.1.4 Policies that facilitate, promote or hamper the transfer of technology
identified.
A63.2.1.2 Researchers and research managers improve their capacity to engage
with policy makers.
B83.2.1.3 Researchers take account of the effect of various policy options on
technology transfer when developing and promoting technologies (sensitivity analysis).
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 13
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3
Problem Component/Outcome Output
C64.Appropriate innovations
A64.1.1 Farmers adopt reduced-risk SI innovations.
A34.1.1.1 Household goals and aspirations understood
A2/A34.1.1.2 Constraints on adoption understood.
A14.1.1.3 A basket of low-risk crop- and livestock innovations with technical
potential for SI developed and tested
A14.1.1.4 Technologies screened for adoptability (‘attractiveness’)
A1/A4/A64.1.2 Feedback from farmers/CRP1.1 researchers informs development of technologies in other CRPs and better approaches for promoting adoption.
A14.1.2.1 Feedback from farmers collected and synthesized.
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 14
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3
Problem Component/Outcome Output
C55. Information
C55.1.1 More peer-to-peer information exchange
A25.1.1.1 Social networks characterized
A65.1.1.2 Improved processes for facilitating information exchange
A65.1.2 New approaches to information flow used
C75.1.2.1 Farmers’ management skills enhanced
A65.1.2.2 Methods using new technologies for information exchange, e.g.
mobile phones, internet, developed.
C65.1.3 Farmers benefit from new niches for exogenous innovation
A2/A65.1.3.1 Validated technologies for identifying and delivering new niches that
complement existing practice
B65.1.4 Public and private sector form integrated information services
A65.1.4.1Public sector data on, e.g. demand, informs private sector investment
opportunities.
?5.1.5 Better informed development at scale.
?
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 15
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3 Satellite Sites
Table 3: Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3, Satellite Sites
Component Outcome Output
C7 Engagement of youth/demographic and social change
C7Youth engaged more productively in agriculture and livestock activities
B7Establishment of youth based agricultural enterprises, including innovation programs and youth focused training courses.
B7Agricultural innovation programs targeting transition from school to employment, with particular focus on agri-business opportunities.
C7Youth engaged in income generating activities derived from agriculture
D2Soil loss and nutrient depletion in mixed crop grazing lands
C1/D2Soil loss and nutrient depletion is halted in mixed crop grazing lands
A4Demonstrate opportunities for value-added activities for smallholder livestock (e.g. milk) and associated benefits of grazing land management.
A1/A4Opportunities for more effective tree-crop livestock integration.
C4Diverse forest resource are maintained and regenerated
B41.2.1 Increase for cover based on community managed regeneration with indigenous species.
B4Community engaged in sustainable conservation based income from forest regeneration and opportunities for eco-tourism etc.
A1Alternative fuelwood sources developed for farmers
A6Efficient energy use interventions promoted within cultural norms
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 16
Impact Pathways – ESA SRT 3 Satellite Sites
Component Outcome Output
C6Technologies are not suitable to local context, and do not appreciate the integrated nature of needs for sustainable intensification.
C6Suite of integrated technologies available relevant to local agro-ecological and socio-economic context
A1/A2Comparative analysis through research evaluation of CRP technologies suitable to local context
A1/B8Participatory technology evaluation by farmers, which is fed into the research evaluation and drives implementation plans.
A6Technology is utilized by extension officers and available in the local market to allow an integrated approach to sustainable intensification.
B4 (C4 D4)Lack of integrated and scaled planning to allow sustainable land use management
B4Appropriate plans at village and district level developed, implemented & enforced.
A5Land management using local context specific cultural norms to aid the reduction of court cases around land-use conflicts.
B4Water resource sharing plans implemented and managed.
CRP 1.1 ESA Impact Pathways – Draft – 27/03/13 Page 17