1

Fodder Adoption and Innovation Projects (FAP and FIP)

Ranjitha Puskur and Alan DuncanInternational Livestock Research Institute

December 2009

Presentation: CGIAR Systemwide Livestock ProgrammeLivestock Policy Group, 1 December 2009

2

Enhancing livelihoods of livestock dependant poor people through

increasing use of fodder

FAP IFAD CIAT, ICARDA, ILRI Ethiopia, Syria & Vietnam

FIP DFID UNU/MERIT – CRISP, ICRISAT, IITA

India & Nigeria

3

FIP Phase-I (2003-2006) Approach- Identification and dissemination of

improved varieties of fodder

LESSONS Promoting fodder technologies is not enough Need to shift from a technology transfer to

capacity strengthening approach-(Requires the building of local systems for change --- an innovation system)

Understand the importance of institutions, interactions and policies

4

Aims of the Projects

FAP - Strengthening capacity of poor livestock keepers to select and adopt fodder options and access market opportunities to enable them to improve their livelihoods and the sustainability of their farming systems

FIP - Enhancing fodder innovation capacity in equitable ways in India and Nigeria

5

Emphases in IS thinking

ActorsLinkagesHabits and practicesPolicy environment

How does it help?

6

A new paradigm in agricultural development?

What’s the old paradigm?

7

Adoption of new technologies by smallholders is generally low

New technologies developed by researchers do not find their way into mainstream practice very easily

Picture of UMB Picture of maize lablabUrea straw treatment UMB

Images from FAO

Cereal/legume intercropping

8

Historical approaches to fodder development

Research Extension Farmer

Linear thinking

9

Value chain and innovation systems

Urbanwholesaler

Rural Farmer

CollectorUrban dairyproducer

Urbanconsumer

Sorghum

Rural farmer

Chopped stover

Collector

Bagged stover

Urbanwholesaler

Raw milk

Urbandairy producer

Proc. Milk

Urbanconsumer

10

Embedding research and extension in a wider system

Urbanwholesaler

Rural Farmer

CollectorUrban dairyproducer

UrbanconsumerUrban

wholesaler

Rural Farmer

CollectorUrban dairyproducer

Urbanconsumer

Research ExtensionUrban

wholesaler

Rural Farmer

CollectorUrban dairyproducer

UrbanconsumerUrban

wholesaler

Rural Farmer

CollectorUrban dairyproducer

Urbanconsumer

Research

Extension

11

What does it mean in practice?

Establishment

of stakeholder

networks

Focus on

promising

technologies

(labour, economics,

demand-driven)

Establishment of stakeholder

networks

Focus on promising

technologies (labour, economics,

demand-driven)

Focus on promising

technologies (labour, economics,

demand-driven)

Establishment of stakeholder

networks

Focus on promising

technologies (labour, economics,

demand-driven)

12

FAP

IPMS Ministry (extension)

NARSFAP

IPMS Ministry (extension)

NARS

Fodder options

identified

Seedsourced

44 farmers plant on

own fields

X-bred cows sourced

Farmers purchase

seed

60 farmers plant on

own fields

Milk transport issues voiced

May 2008

Oct 2009

Dairy co-op formed

FAP

IPMS Ministry (extension)

NARS

Ethiopian Meat & Dairy

Tech Inst.

Eden FieldSeeds

Land o Lakes

FAP

IPMS Ministry (extension)

NARS

Ethiopian Meat & Dairy

Tech Inst.

Eden FieldSeeds

Land o Lakes

Milk transport negotiations

ongoing

FAP

IPMS Ministry (extension)

NARS

Ethiopian Meat & Dairy

Tech Inst.

Eden FieldSeeds

Land o Lakes

Ada’a Dairy Co-op

Crop Growplc

Godino DairyCo-op

FAP

IPMS Ministry (extension)

NARS

Ethiopian Meat & Dairy

Tech Inst.

Eden FieldSeeds

Land o Lakes

Ada’a Dairy Co-op

Crop Growplc

Godino DairyCo-op

Organisational innovation

Technical innovationInnovation processes in Ada’a Ethiopia

13

Fodder Innovation Project (FIP)

14

Phase-II (2007-2009) Approach/Research Design:

– Explore ways of strengthening fodder innovation capacity

• action research with selected partner organisations (India and Nigeria)

• institutional and policy analysis

• develop an “interface” between research and policy making through establishing a policy working group (FIPWG)

Key question to be answered- What is required to strengthen capacity for innovation and change?

15

Fodder Innovation Capacity We argue that

Fodder innovation capacity will be strengthened when institutional and policy change enable a continuous process of framing and reframing of the way fodder-relevant knowledge is created, diffused, adapted, shared and put into use

Or, to put it more simply, if we could improve networking among the wide range of organisations having fodder-livestock relevant knowledge, it could enable institutional and policy changes needed for innovation to happen.

16

FIP2 Worked with a range of KPOs

– Government (RAGACOVAS – a traditional veterinary university)– Semi-government (SG2000 – extension and technology focused)– Non-Government (FES, WOTR, JDPC – broader rural

development agenda, community empowerment and collective action focus)

In each site, action was based on context-specific themes - ranging from fodder focus to commercialization of smallholder goat farming.

This led to very context and theme-specific network building process, with different entry points (ranging from forest seeding with fodder species to animal vaccination camps).

Different trajectories are beginning to evolve.

17

Project components Development of

conceptual framework and research design

Landscaping exercise for partner selection (KPOs)

Livestock practice and socio-economic benchmarking

Fodder innovation capacity diagnosis

shared understanding of the new approach

sympathy, diversity, poverty focus, scale and links to policy and social science expertise

to understand change in impact (before and after)

rapid for identification of research themes specific for each KPO locationdetailed for benchmarking and tracking changes in capacity – the focus was on analysis of actors, institutions, patterns of interaction and policies

18

Project components-cont’d Development and

implementation of rolling action plans

Development of monitoring and learning system

Institutional and policy study at national level

Innovation mentoring or coaching to partners

Formation of Fodder Innovation Policy Working Groups (FIPWG)

ongoing to deal with new challenges and opportunities

primarily to track changes in behaviour of individuals, organisations and networks

to understand macro-level issues that impinge on local innovation processes

help the KPOs/networks to appreciate the value of their actions, analyse outcomes and help redefine action plans

Link research and policy

19

Immediate outcomesFarm level outcomes

Some changes in farm and livestock feeding practices (JDPC, Ragacovas), but at a very early stage.

New arrangements for fodder supply (Ragocovas)- dairy co-operative emerged as the intermediary between fodder entrepreneurs and livestock keepers

New fodder production initiatives in WOTR with forest department, agricultural university and department of Animal husbandry.

Better coverage in vaccination through organising animal health camps collaboratively (FES)

More efficient and co-ordinated service provision to farmers (FES, SG-2000)

Retrieving a portion of encroached grazing lands (SG 2000) Increased demand for inputs and services - fodder seeds,

knowledge on balanced feeding

20

Immediate outcomesSystem level behavioural changes

Unusual partnerships- Goat producer and goat merchants(JDPC); Agricultural University and Forest Department (WoTR)

Collaboration in vaccine supply and african swine fever research (JDPC and NVRI); new demands for research support-improved goat breeds

Taking on new responsibilities: From training on fodder aspects to co-ordinating fodder platform and liaising with different actors (Ragacovas)

Attempts at mainstreaming innovation systems approach (FES)

Invitation to contribute to national fodder planning and policy discussions (Planning Commission, India)

Better co-ordination and streamlining activities by 3 different organisations-KNARDA, LGA, FADAMA-III (SG-2000)

Articulation of emerging problems, and collective search for solutions

21

Some lessons.. Appropriate technology (e.g. planted fodder)

introduced through existing stakeholders is useful catalyst for raising and addressing broader system constraints

However, fodder is too narrow a theme for building networks

Building networks around crop- livestock value chains and building innovation capacity at that level seems more appropriate

Working with stakeholder platforms means technological focus soon gives way to organizational issues

22

Some lessons..

Facilitating stakeholder platforms is time-consuming and monitoring change is not trivial.

Highlights the critical role of broker/connector/catalyst organisations -depending on ground situation (history of partners and the degree of social capital they bring is critical)

23

Some lessons..

Implications for how R4D projects are designed and managed – both for research managers and donors. – traditional logframes and M&E systems may

not be very appropriate.– project financial management and planning

needs to be untied, flexible and nimble to accommodate actions to address emerging opportunities and challenges effectively

24

Some lessons..

Engaging policy actors from the beginning helps in finding windows for influence and ownership for research results

Feedback from policy stakeholders is that the evidence is very valuable, but the evidence base is narrow/small.

Processes and lessons need longer timeframe to mature before they have currency in policy debates and changes.

25

FIP-FAP Meta analysisWhy and how?

To distil lessons on effective ways of developing systems and capabilities to innovate in different contexts in the smallholder livestock sector, and respond to challenges and opportunities

Draws on empirical evidence emerging from the FIP and the FAP projects, and literature in the relevant fields

26

Objectivescompare and contrast different approaches

and contexts that impinge on innovation network formation and performance

document and share good and replicable practices

develop guidance on innovation network formation and performance

Identify mechanisms for making innovation networks sustainable and pro-poor

27

Where do we go from here…. Networks have formed and are beginning to perform.. Sites set up to be effective learning laboratories – opportunity to

follow the innovation trajectories and how innovation capacity evolves

Building on this, we could form innovation platforms around C-L value chains

Test different kinds of organisations to play the brokerage role Testing strategies to make innovation pro-poor and pro-women More vigorous and systematic engagement with policy Opportunity to design and test appropriate and effective M&E

systems

28

ILRI is creating and integrating knowledge to enable diverse partners to

find innovative solutions to make livestock a sustainable pathway out of

poverty