a new way to conceive ifad-cgiar partnerships
Upload: international-water-management-institute-iwmi-cgiar-water-land-and-ecosystems-program
Post on 19-Jun-2015
337 views
DESCRIPTION
Presentation on IFAD-CGIAR collaboration in Lao PDR, by Michael Victor at CPWF's final grant event at IFAD in October 2014.TRANSCRIPT
A new way to conceive IFAD – CGIAR Partnerships An example from Lao PDR
By Michael Victor & Stefania Dina
Conventional Research Communication
IFAD-CPWF mainstreaming innovations Theory of Change
IMPACT
Re-/Packaged Materials Used by:
Outcome StoriesMain change
agents
Key messages - Smart card/
posters
IFAD Country Program Managers
Know about CPWF work & people most relevant to
their work
Engage and interact with our networks
Sourcebook (articles)
IFAD in-country project staff
Interested towards our work and social capital
and partnership networks
Adapt and contextualize what is useful for their work
Briefing/ insight notes
Metasynthesis
Institutional Histories
Any other materials
Knowledge, attitude and skills changes
Changes in behaviour and practice
Project Activities
Improved food security and
livelihoods of poor rural communities
OUTCOMESOUTPUTS
Other partner development & implementation
professionals
Have the skills to pick the suitable findings/
technologies
CPWF Mainstreaming tested out new ideas but still:• Supply driven • Not jointly designed with country investment
portfolios
Current IFAD technical projects – difficult to retrofit in country portfolios
Technical/thematic project often are designed with little inputs from country portfolios• Lack of buy-in ownership
from CPMs• Difficult to find synergies • Research results hard to
adapt to IFAD project interventions
Moving toward a strategic partnership: Example from Lao PDR between IFAD and WLE
A simple solution: Design partnerships at the country and investment portfolio level from the start. Different entry points:• Technical inputs in project design, implementation and evaluation• Action research around key problems identified in projects• Strategic entry points based on country context
Activities to date
Project level • Supervisory mission by WLE
staff member• Identification of key entry points
for project interventions• Inputs on KM related issues in
one project• Greater interaction of
WLE/IWMI researchers in IFAD missions.
Joint work around policy dialogue:• Coordinated support to the Lao
Policy Think Tank, not silo’d • Joint organization of National
R4D Forum
Innovations
Co-design based on common interests
Flexibility in contracting Focus on knowledge and
engagement: • Simple technical advice• Action research to delve
deeper and find solutions
Drawing on a pool of expertise wider than IWMI
Focused on solving local problems
Advantages of this approach
Fulfil mutual objectives Large return on investment –
• Small investment (100-200k) can directly influence large investment projects
Developing long-term relations & institutional memory
Access to a pool of expertise that is locally appropriate
Independent and constructive advice
Challenges
Getting over initial resistance and myths:• Myth 1: Researchers are just
acting as consultants• Myth 2: Hard to create
innovation if you are just responding to demand
Developing such a relationships takes interest and trust from both CPM and CG institute
Developing flexible contracts has been difficult
Questions for discussion
How can such an approach be used in other countries and regions? What are barriers or incentives for such partnerships to develop?