14
Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Key Questions 1: How much do we know about the effectiveness of innovation system approach and the IP concept Ample knowledge is available from the experience of the SSA CP where the concept has been implemented with successes on 36 platforms. The proof of the concept is being documented for publications soon. A number of documentation is available for consultation. Training on innovation system approach and how to facilitate an IP is possible and could be facilitated by FARA.

Citation preview

Page 1: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Report of Working Group IIInnovation Platforms and

Partnerships

Page 2: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Our Assignment

To discuss the feasibility of IP and issues around adapting it

to the NA&WA

Page 3: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 1: How much do we know about the effectiveness of innovation system approach and the IP concept• Ample knowledge is available from the

experience of the SSA CP where the concept has been implemented with successes on 36 platforms.

• The proof of the concept is being documented for publications soon.

• A number of documentation is available for consultation.

• Training on innovation system approach and how to facilitate an IP is possible and could be facilitated by FARA.

Page 4: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 2: What is the main difference between the strategic IP, Operational IP and the Innovation Clusters

• The strategic IP operates at the higher level of leadership and governance to design the strategies for agricultural development. It is made up of all the stakeholders selected around the innovation sphere of the agricultural system.

• Operational IP do implement activities that target different commodities or system of production, while the innovation clusters are subsets of the operational IP with

Page 5: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 3: Can the IP concept work effectively in the dry area considering the culture and traditions

• Questions around the possibility of having IPs that are gender neutral

• The locations will determine the integration of gender issues.

• The different IP will be designed to address the prevalent local conditions.

Page 6: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 4: How do you scale out the IPs..is there a replication concept in place?

• With the set up different IC at the different sites, how do we then scale out the concept?

• There is the need to be innovative when setting up the IPs to address systems of production, with the understanding that several commodities are present within a system.

• The scaling out refers to the concept itself and not the specific technologies only.

Page 7: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 5: Can Gender mainstreaming be dealt with on an IP

• The IP concept can effectively address gender issues as gender is a major research subject in the delivery pathway of the concept.

• Experience from SSA CP showed that IP could be created to specially work with women.

• Notwithstanding, creativity is required to blend gender related issues within cultures that limit free participation of different gender group.

Page 8: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 6: Who is best to initiate and lead the IP ( Should the IPs be demanded?)• It is proven that it would be successful when led by

the private sector.

• The SSA CP experience also showed that the public sector; Researcher led IP can be truly successful.

• Any ARD stakeholder can initiate and facilitate the IP

• However… rational thinking suggests that the role of initiating and leading the IP within the structured public system should be the prerogative of the extension/advisory system.

Page 9: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 7: What about the cost of the IP set up and facilitation. Will it not be a burden on the ARD system?

• There is always cost for development, the linear system also have a cost, but returns seems to be limited.

• The cost / benefits needs to be balanced to justly appraise the systems.

• The cost of IP is though little and it is around the facilitation of the platform and it reduces as the platform matures.

Page 10: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 8: Has there been any failure story of any IP.

• Yes and IP can fail. But most known failure is due to leadership issues on the IP.

• Every IP will necessarily go through the group formation dynamics of Forming – Storming – Norming- Performing

Page 11: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 9: How do we identify the main Partner for an IP ?• Consider the guiding principles for establishing a

functional IP. Key principle is …“ Every stakeholder must have a contribution to

make and a benefit to derive from the activities of the IP”

• Engage partners along the commodity value chain, with the consideration of the output market.

• A few necessary stakeholders outside the chain include the policy maker, researchers, extension etc.

Page 12: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

CRP 1.1 Partners• Researchers• Extension• Agro meteorologist• Policy makers

• Farmers• Financial institution• Input dealers• Agro-processors /Service

providers• Output market/ end users

Public Sector

Private Sector

Page 13: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships

Key Questions 10: How do we handle capacity development for establishment and facilitation of IP

• FARA could facilitate training of key stakeholders on how to establish and run an innovation platform in a 2 days marathon program.

Page 14: Report of Working Group II Innovation Platforms and Partnerships