Meteo Mali Agrometeorological Program Evaluation: Preliminary
Report Edward R. Carr Department of Geography University of South
Carolina Slide 2 Assessment Background June 2011 meeting in Dakar
Demand-driven assessment Lessons learned/good practices Scaling up
Slide 3 Assessment Design Three components Science assessment IRI
Institutional assessment CCAFS Field assessment
CCAFS/IER/University of South Carolina Slide 4 Science Assessment
Goals What climate information is provided to farmers? What is the
scientific basis for this information? What is the translation and
dissemination process? What opportunities are there for improving
the quality and relevance products? What challenges have been
encountered in satisfying specific user needs? Slide 5 Science
Assessment February 2012 Meetings with Mali Meteo Consultations
with AGRHYMET and ACMAD Review of methods and documentation
Integration with field assessment findings Slide 6 Science
Assessment Draft Assessment prepared at the end of July 2012
Example challenges Difficulty of providing reliable local-scale
forecasts Onset of the rainy season Timing of possible dry spell.
Need for monthly forecasts Lack of verification information +
Raingauge * Agroclimate o Synoptic Malis network of meteorological
stations Slide 7 Science Assessment Draft Assessment Example
opportunities Prospects for improved downscaling Merging satellite
and station data Using Global Producing Centre (GPC) model outputs
to strengthen seasonal and monthly forecasts Distribution of known
GLAM villages Slide 8 Institutional Assessment Learn what
institutional factors contributed to program success Narrative
program history Identification of product development process
Mapping of the changing flow of information, products, and
resources in the program Slide 9 Institutional Assessment June
November 2012 Responses from 12 informants Follow-ups ongoing Draft
document prepared Slide 10 Institutional Assessment Slide 11
Example draft findings Coordinating group was highly
interdisciplinary but informal Continuous project funding allowed
time to learn Opportunities Broader focus for information
(including livestock and fisheries) Formalized frameworks that
entrench and support the interdisciplinarity of the program Slide
12 Field Assessment Goal Identify current impacts of the program on
participants Explain the causes of these impacts Both
extraordinarily difficult to do post-hoc Slide 13 Field Assessment
January 2012 March 2012 36 villages 18 GLAM, 18 control 144 focus
groups 720 interviews Men and women Young and old Slide 14 Slide 15
Slide 16 Field Assessment Broad assessment Livelihoods practices
Agricultural activities Engagement with NGOs Engagement with the
Agromet program Slide 17 Field Assessment Analysis ongoing Over
430,000 data Validation of controls No baselines Too long a
duration Identification of groupings for analysis Slide 18 Slide 19
Slide 20 Field Assessment Initial findings Opportunities to build
on end-user delivery Opportunities to better target end-user needs
Current and in preparation for future needs Opportunities to expand
the user base Heavily focused on younger men Slide 21 Field
Assessment Initial findings Suggestions of impact Differential
numbers of crops grown/varieties used by those who use agromet data
and those who do not Varies by grouping/agroecological zone Complex
impact by crop Slide 22 Field Assessment Limitations Will have
difficulty talking about yield impact Will have difficulty
establishing causality for impact Addressing the Limitations
Re-running the survey in February-March 2013 Qualitative work in
selected villages in May-July 2013 Slide 23 Coming soon Integration
of science and field assessments Will look at science constraints
and opportunities in context of end-user demands Rigorous
assessment of impact at the end- user level Integrated lessons
learned and good practices Connecting science, institutional
context, and end-user impact Slide 24 Acknowledgements
