Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Co-Production ofClimate Smart Services
W.-L. Bartels, E.R. Carr, L. Some,A.S. Moussa, S.H. Rao, A. Tall,
P.C.S. Traore, K. Venkatasubramanian
Initial writing team
• W.-L. Bartels, [email protected] • E.R. Carr, [email protected]• A.S. Moussa, [email protected]• S.H. Rao, [email protected]• L. Some, [email protected] • A. Tall, [email protected] • P.C.S. Traore, [email protected] • K. Venkatasubramanian, [email protected]
Goal, Objectives
• Opportunity addressed: more participatory processes and trans-disciplinarity in the development and deployment of climate-smart services from communities to regions
• Goal: build a design & deployment framework for climate-smart services
• Timeline: 2013-2015
How will farmers and rural communities benefit
• Project intervention areas:– Direct involvement in service design (organic
process)• Beyond project intervention areas:– Community of Practice around multi-stakeholder
process design– Scaling through aggregate levels of intervention
(districts to regions) – phase II
Where will they benefit
• 12n+ Communities (~ homogeneous livelihood)– For each district, a set of intervention and control communities
selected following a rigorous, stratified random sampling process taking account of
• 12+ Districts (~ homogeneous climate)– For each country, at least 2 districts representing contrasted climatic
conditions (e.g. Koutiala and Bougouni in Mali) • 6 Countries (~ homogeneous extension)
– For each region, 2 countries representing contrasted experience and capacity related to climate services (e.g. Mali and Ghana in West Africa)
• 3 Regions (~ homogeneous policy)– West & Central Africa, East & Southern Africa, Southern Asia
Good practices / overarching concepts
• Participatory action-research• Climate services climate-SMART services (climate
as one component of a greater system of services, not a standalone )
• Balanced paradigm to effectively embed environmental goals within development goals (vulnerability AND competencies, constraints AND opportunities, resilience AND intensification)
• Rigorous M&E system for impact assessment of process-based interventions
How to get started? Next steps?1. Writeshop meeting
1. Purpose: write full project proposal2. Rationale: extend the participatory process design to also include proposal writing3. 10-12 people involving core team members + representatives from farmers, NGOs, ag/extension services,
met. Services, agro-dealers, private sector, policy4. towards end of Q1 2013, using USAID seed funds
2. Assessment of knowledge, opportunities, and demand1. Purpose: take stock, assess potential for engagement, by whom, where and for what (blueprinting)2. Rationale: organically start the process from the bottom up3. Farmer & Community level (keep in mind social differentiations)4. Institutional level (met, academia/research, boundary institutions: communication, extension,
intermediaries, policy level)
3. Open the space for dialogue (CoP) and build platforms for interactions between identified actors1. Purpose: migrate from blueprint to “assembly line” – nuts and bolts of the participatory process design
including innovation platforms, agricultural & communication technologies etc.
4. Sustain the platforms for continued, iterative co-production of climate-smart services (interactions between farmers and multi-disciplinary technical services)
5. Design mechanism to showcase best practices related to process design1. Vertical farmer exchange visits here?
Measuring success• Success: climate-smart services have been identified,
demonstrated good practices • Set up an experimental design where co-produced services are
compared with non co-produced services• Identification of tools for dialogue/bridging the gap between
farmers, agr and met research communities appropriate for each scale of intervention (community, subnational, national, regional and global)
• Iterative M&E protocol with counterfactuals (controls) – rigorous RCT design ported from the technology to the process level
• Indicators measuring the intensity in exchange of tools and methods across the various levels of granularity (communication methods / radios)
Other ideas for consideration• Level of ownership of CCAFS is variable• Need to engage people who want to be engaged• Avoid becoming a ‘gender’ thing• Support different teams in starting a new process design from
beginning to end• What’s the buy-in for this process (where are all the national
stakeholders?)• Our specificity: we are proposing a framework to design processes of
engagement that will ultimately lead to climate-smart services ( building capacity for teams within the CCAFS community to design these processes)
• Learn from participatory plant breeding & selection• Assessing the barriers to some of these participatory processes
