ESA_planning_review_2012_day5

=East and Southern Africa Annual Review and Planning meeting = toc ** Ngurdoto Mountain Lodge, ** ** Arusha, Tanzania ** Back to the event agenda page
 * 1-5 October 2012 **

=Day 5 - Friday 5 October=

Welcome and introductions

 * **Irmgard Hoeschle-Zeledon**: Year 2 has just started this Monday. Partnerships are crucial to get our work done. I am confident that we can be successful in implementing this project.
 * **Jerry Glover**: I would like to thank our in-country partners. Our CG partners and particularly IITA have been instrumental. Over a year ago we had a vague idea when we started our three separate projects in the three program regions. In the past year we have developed a broad program and in the meantime developed jump-start activities. Partnerships are central. We don't see this as a USAid project. We are talking to other partners such as DfID and host country partners to influence the course of this project. We hope to expand the partnerships in this program. Thank you for coming.
 * **Viktor Manyong**: Welcome to all new participants. We are committed to the success of this project. We have developed partnerships and now we need to move on for the next four years. The IITA office in East Africa has established a project office in Arusha and will support this project all the way. I wish you a very good meeting day.

Enhancing vegetable value chain
We carried out a baseline survey and worked on 5 activities/outputs: get baseline, food safety (using online/off farm samples) + analysis of microbe infestation, building partnerships among CG centres and Tanzanian partners, reflection workshop to exchange lessons learnt and awareness raising. Surveys were conducted and we have samples, analysis coming soon... some issues about contracting. More time would help. The presentation is available.
 * Reactions from the crowd**:
 * Use of crop residue to feed livestock --> also as an option to address crop-livestock conflicts
 * Incorporating livestock feeds in farming systems (--> ILRI)
 * Utilization of manure for vegetable production in urban and periurban areas
 * Partnerships?
 * Addressing soil-borne pest and diseases in intensified systems
 * Commercialization of improved released vegetables

Value chain analysis of grain legumes
We tried to mobilize partnerships. We tried and mapped out where crops (cow peas, common beans, ground nuts, pigeon peas etc.) were grown for the three countries. Where are the markets? How is the crop moving from production to consumption centers? What are opportunities to expand the value chain? What are key constraints? Major research interventions to increase productivity? We catalogued best bets developed and mobilized them for farmers. We mapped which key partners (private sector and NGOs) that may need to be mobilized in the Africa RISING.
 * Reactions from the crowd ** :
 * Priorities for each country
 * Seeds
 * Production systems - adoption
 * Gender

Catalogue of tested crops, soil and water management options
We identified 10 technologies already documented etc. including CA, fertilization, intercropping, agro-forestry, organic & inorganic input uses. The objective was the adoption of these technologies. These technologies are not adopted by farmers because of unavailability of inputs, seeds, fertilizers etc. Some farmers are not ready to cope with some technologies that will take too long. Grain legumes are difficult to push to farmers etc. Dissemination of training materials: there are lots out there so there's no lack but agro-dealers are an issue: distribution is not good in Zambia and Tanzania. One agro-dealer serves 3000 households. We found out more about political environment and other initiatives in this area. Many initiatives are implemented by other organizations. In terms of policy environment, we can use a number of policies but some areas have to be improved e.g. seed systems. We need to identify the degradation of hot spots. We used a model (LDSF framework from the AfSys project) to map erosion. We need to work on more parameters.
 * Reactions from the crowd**:
 * M&E exercise to catalogue for best bet options along the different jumpstart projects
 * Water management technologies are few and need a systematic evaluation within this project
 * Link participatory research of the management options with LSDF-based soil health constraints information
 * Identification and mapping degradation hotspots
 * Crop response (to fertilizer) and LDSF sites co-treated to included ecological impact

Efficient seed system assessment
We brought together the MoA from Tanzania, a control institute in Zambia, ICRISAT, IITA, CIAT etc. Seeds are available. How can producers make seeds available to communities? What areas can we strengthen around seed systems? Different crops e.g. maize are covered here, as well as legumes, beans... There is a lag between use and access. Forage seeds are missing. No lease process in place for communities. Efforts going on for maize (gov't program, private sector). We are suggesting to strengthen quality-declared seeds. Involve private sector and improve policies for legume contributions to cropping systems.
 * Reactions from the crowd ** :
 * QDS strengthening: Training/re-training around QDS
 * Actoin research on sustainability/viability of QDS enterprises!
 * Looking at policies to enhance QDS uses beyond the ward / marketing in Tanzania!
 * Building extension / local inspectors (farmers) to carry out quality control
 * QDS seed prices! (profitability)
 * Expanding production / marketing / dissemination / packing / labelling - engaging policy-makers on expansion of QDS
 * Seed quality control in both QDS/certified seeds (empower [education] the control agencies, farmers, producers (seeds)
 * Engaging and expanding private ?? for legumes (through agro-dealers, shopkeepers, sellers)
 * Sera project USAid Tanzania
 * Seed policy / regulation, access to basic public and private sector
 * Catalogue of released varieties / registration of these varieties

Seed multiplication
Our project was with 3 CG centers (ICRISAT, CIMMYT and CIAT) and NARS. Objective: increase provision of best seeds, increase capacity of NARS, build partnership with private sector seed companies. Activities in the last season: we produced various seeds, working with 5 legumes.
 * Reactions from the crowd ** :
 * What about seeds of forages?
 * Kitulo - Southern Highlands TZ
 * Coxsfoot
 * Rye grass
 * Perennial rye grass
 * White clover

Improved post-harvest technologies
We carried out a survey. We did a training course for 20 artisans who looked at options to promote post-harvest technologies using super green valve etc. technology that does not use many chemicals. We should keep on promoting that technology in those areas. We collaborated with CIMMYT and SUA on this. We undertook a baseline survey to identify post-harvest factors responsible for security in the villages. We worked in 2 districts and we covered 14 villages. We used 2 types of approaches: interviews and household surveys. We found out that there was a problem of shading sorghum and a problem for livestock people to separate ?? from milk. 20-25% of crops were destroyed. There is a problem of nutrition for children etc.
 * Reactions from the crowd ** :
 * Availability of pH technologies to other countries e.g. Zambia
 * Prices of metal containers

Mycotoxins in maize and cassava
Mycotoxins are poisons in the field and storage. We worked on partnerships. Mycotoxins are a sensitive issue. We worked with SUA and the MoA and Tanzanian food and drug agency and pesticide institute. We collected samples, worked with DALDOs. We handed out fact sheets to increase awareness about mycotoxins. 3000 in Swahili and 1000 sheets in English. Understanding is very low in Tanzania. Samples have been analyzed and we looked at 200 metabolites (most thorough survey ever done on this issue). We found less mycotoxin in cassava than expected but in maize we found hot spots and highlighted what farmers are doing in the field and in storage.
 * Reactions from the crowd ** :
 * Possible partners / sources of information:
 * Harvest Choice + CSIRO,
 * University of Minnesota + ILRI (BeCa) Jagger, Delia Grace (animals)
 * North Tanzania / West Kenya
 * DART company: detection + aflatoxin + maize varietal
 * Describe levels cassava and maize: processing storage techniques
 * How do consumers protect themselves when mycotoxins are invisible? Maize ugali, groundnut sauce & butter, feeds
 * Trade covers
 * Dumping into local markets
 * Crop-livestock systems: livestock milk meat poisoned with mycotoxins: CISA (BMGF funded) Michael Blummel ILRI India, CIMMYT
 * Poultry feed - meat and eggs poisoned
 * Target interventions / prioritize

Evergreen agriculture
ICRAF worked with ??? . Agro-ecology looks at crops, livestock etc. and also natural resource management. We looked at socio-economic and biophysical constraints and looked at how evergreen can address constraints. 60% of pop is food-insecure (based on surveys conducted in Kongwa and Kiteto). Small farm size which is constraining because low use of inputs e.g. fertilizers or improved seeds. Degradation around land use (erosion, grazing, nutrient depletion etc.). What strategy to sustain agricultural expansion? We have 25% increase in cultivated areas. There is a need for intensification. Trees and shrubs can help with conservation and land restoration. They provide fodder, food etc.
 * Reactions from the crowd ** :
 * Production, environmental / climate change adaptation and mitigation
 * Crop-livestock-soil
 * Fodder and pasture management: fodder res., conflict resolutions
 * Feed resources (moringa leaf, Lulwenu leaf
 * Improved manure quality from high quality feed intake
 * Crop soil:
 * Minimize land degradation (soil, erosion control)
 * Part of ISFM options
 * Soil and water management
 * How does EGA link to Climate Change?
 * Improve rain water use efficiency by crops
 * As a component of soil and water management? e.g. rain water harvesting: tillage with trees, tied ridges + tree/shrubs
 * Restoring forest cover in agric. landscapes (carbon sequestration, landscape hydrology)

Weed management in rice-based systems
Weeds are an important constraint in rice for intensified systems. We wanted to focus on weed problems and management. There are few weed scientists in Africa and they are not working together. We wanted to increase collaboration among them. Our Quick Win worked on a) increase/enhance weed science network and scientific exchange of ideas and enhance access for national partners to this important info --> organized workshop in SUA inviting many stakeholders b) produce videos on labor-saving management and on effective herbicide use (rotary weeders) c) trained artisans, blacksmiths etc. from different parts of TZ to manufacture parts of rotary weeders d) tested rotary weeders to see how effective they are for time/labor inputs and for yield. Weeders can help reduce weeding time by 60-65%.
 * Reactions from the crowd ** :
 * Can rotary weeders be used in other crops? Yes if adapted to upland/dryland conditions. There are already several weeder-types available for these conditions
 * Are rotary weeders better than herbicide? --> They still need quite some time for operation. Fermale farmers might find it hard to operate. Africa Rice and partners are interested / focused on augmenting the 'basket of options' for improving rice productivity and we are working on locally adaptable technologies. Hence for some farmers herbicide might work best, while for others rotary weeders might be an economically interesting alternative. Herbicides, when applied well, provide good, season-long weed control, but they are relatively expensive. With the rotary weeders, weeding time can be reduced by 50-65% compared to hand weeding and they are relatively cheap compared to herbicides as they are a one-time investment.
 * Can I join the weed science network? --> You can join at www.afroweeds.org/network.

Intensification of maize-based systems in Malawi
How to diversify different ag systems in Malawi? We wanted to look at other food crops than maize. This year we did sweet potato and cassava. We wanted to take a comprehensive look at how they perform: soil fertility, input use, crop dynamics, economic analysis. Findings: residue retention of CA is key in looking at drought resilience to climate change in CA systems; Sweet potato didn't do very well in CA systems (some crops have to be analyzed further for inclusion in CA systems).
 * Reactions from the crowd ** :
 * Include the value addition of working on stover nutrition for livestock. This is a crop livestock region.

Agro-ecological intensification in Malawi and Tanzania
We worked with technologies that have been proven and work and we need to put into context. We looked at past experiences with tech transfer that reach out to all farmer typologies. We don't want to exclude poor farmers. We wanted to emphasize options to work with farmers on the ground. The approach we used was mother-baby trials (the latter with farmers taking the best tech and implementing them). Once at scale we start improving productivity, nutrition. We built partnerships in Malawi with Bunda college, IITA, ICRISAT, NGOs in Ndedza and Ntcheu (e.g. World Vision). Working with DALDOs.
 * Reactions from the crowd ** :

Presentation by Mateete Bekunda
This week's workshop has identified research issues and entry options at integrated system improvement level, they define potential research team action zones. We focus on interactions between land (soil/water), crop and livestock, bearing in mind a series of cross-cutting challenges such as seeds & breeds, nutrition, value addition etc. We want to develop research teams around the five main issues (interactions around integrated improvement + situation analysis).

Discussion around year 2 program
Comment: The newcomer was pleasantly impressed on the basis of integration of interventions (moving forward in the way it was intended) and because the presentation of Mateete clearly factored in livestock. It wasn't obvious how jumpstarts would be integrated. There is a lot of experience among us we just need to get the pieces together.


 * Q**: We need more details on increasing nutrition (people / animal health) - we assume that diversification will improve nutrition but where is the analysis. Food & environment safety in rice and maize safety. Is there any true incorporation of efforts to improve nutritional outcomes? Any activity linked there? What are practical mechanism to move forward?
 * A**: We have limited resources and nutrition activities are very expensive. We're not going to affect or research on climate change but there might be cases of addressing nutrition without researching on it. The issue of food safety in veg systems has been mentioned under 'markets' in rice-based systems.


 * Comment**: Program integration. For livestock one issue is grazing. Intercropping etc. could provide food for livestock. Feed supply is not very big but there are livestock crops that could help. Seeds for faster crops should be grown. In some areas we can look at faster seeds. For evergreen agriculture, what is manure pricing for livestock? We have to make use of manure.

As re: contracting, I need to know who does what - which will be organized by research teams. This will happen soon. On the question on information system building, the M&E team is trying to set up a web-based platform keeping track of all sites identified and to build an interface to store the data associated with these points. Which information will be accessible to the M&E team? In the M&E team we try to link that with farming system modelling for more predictive/scaling uses. We don't have that information system platform in place yet - we need to work with research teams to design an interface that helps capture data etc.
 * Q**: The site selection will be very important for scaling up. We need to work on it in an integrated team. Research team memberships were not clear, ToR were not clear. Can we clarify this? Are research teams based on themes to facilitate coordination? Database management needs to be addressed. Bureaucracy in contracting etc. - considering planting season how do we plan to move forward?
 * A**: The workshop gave clues on who wants to sit on which research team. We will refine these research teams. About database management, IFPRI could be partnering.


 * Comment**: We have 4 systems: crop-land, intensive (crop) livestock, extensive crop livestock, rice systems. We don't want to neglect rice. In systems where we work only on crops, poultry should/could also be featured there. Nutrition is so central to our efforts that it should be in all research, but it doesn't mean that we conduct research on it. We have to measure improvements in nutrition.


 * Q**: FtF has the objective to increase co-production. About rice/vegetable-based systems, we hear about improved varieties but most improved varieties are susceptible to insect attacks. What can we do to mitigate pest management. We are aiming to increase production in a sustainable manner.
 * A**: For the crops, legumes, cereals etc. the point is whether you provide ?? We have to test processing methods. We have to compromise because we are trying to move forward on this while keeping processing feasible. For improved productivity, it's difficult to get the most resistant varieties.
 * Comment**: We should agree on principles for our deliverables and on some basic design features that allow us to scale up and out. We have to go as team in our design.
 * Comment**: After yesterday's visit, I'm not sure whether vegetables are covered. Horticulture really needs irrigation.
 * Comment**: We need to have the typologies of systems emerging which would be useful for this project and other projects. All the better if those typologies are generic. It's a good start. In that clustering, we talked about rice/vegetable as separate but the other 2 clusters could also move across each other from intensive to semi-intensive systems. Typologies could look into this.
 * Comment**: The visit was very impressive and we heard the practical implications for farmers. I learned a few things: in the maize fields, there are fields with too much irrigation - sthg needs to be done there. In another field the paddy seedlings have been growing there and one farmer insisted that some fields were used up and others not because some seedlings become very thin. Farmers can reduce the amount of transplanting. How does this information reach the farmers? It's not easy to reach all farmers. Now with climate change, we need to calculate the production.


 * Q**: It's not very clear to what extent the members tried to engage with other projects e.g. around baseline surveys, soil characterization etc. which could be done by projects. This is in the action plan and beyond when you start implementing.
 * A**: This was not presented this morning but each group came up with a list of key collaborators and partners. We have a meeting with some of the key partners this afternoon.

--> We are working directly with Nafaka etc. as a research-focused project. We want to get closer to the private sector.
 * Q**: I'm glad that soil fertility is coming up as a major constraint in a number of presentations. We need to see how we can work with the AR project about this. The project committee does not include private sector actors. But I saw Ken Giller on the committee. He could represent WUR as well as our project.
 * A**: Ken Giller was suggested as the member of the scientific advisory committee. The PCC is steering the project. We don't have private sector actors there. We failed to identify which private sector reps to invite there.

The humid tropics CRP has a gender strategy and we could tap into that, given the relations with Africa RISING. We are setting up a training course addressing gender issues and will offer this to Africa RISING. --> We talked about the nutritional aspects in 1.3 - we don't need to reinvent the wheel. --> ASARECA has a mandate in this and has been organizing a variety of training sessions on this. The Maize CRP, Simlesa etc. are also addressing gender activities.
 * Q**: We talked about communication strategy and an M&E plan but I didn't see a gender strategy.
 * A**: We don't have an explicit gender strategy but it is among the cross-cutting factors. Gender, markets are represented there. We have a gender specialist from USAid on the scientific advisory committee.


 * Q**: The project seems based more on maize and rice systems. But which of the other crops, which legumes etc. are we talking about? How was the decision about these crops taken? About yield? Farmers priorities? Long term soil fertility considerations? For rice, vegetables only or should we not consider other?
 * A**: In rice-based and maize-based systems, other crops co-exist. The other crops are e.g. cassava. We talk about systems and the reason is that maize and rice value chains are particularly important for FtF.

Elizabeth Maeda (USAid Tanzania)

 * Sites chosen are among the best sites. The maize-based systems are very important
 * I am pleased to see a lot of things in terms of partnering with different organisations.
 * My advice or concern: Africa RISING should make sure that they cooperate very closely with other development partners such as e.g. CIMMYT’s Simlesa. It would be a very good opportunity to partner with them about what has been done so far and to work together on some of the gaps.
 * From the discussions, one component is missing: market issues. It was mentioned in the rice-based systems but in crop-livestock and crop-soil systems markets are essential.
 * Another issue is what happened in East Africa today. Migration, HIV Aids etc. how can women farmers help address these challenges.
 * Climate change: Whether working on CG or national systems we need to assess impact of these

Liz Ogutu (ILRI / Australian International Food Security Council

 * I’m grateful for being invited to this. It’s great to see that you are looking at similar systems than the Australian International Food Security Centre. There are lots of similarities, there are lots of opportunities for synergies there. The projects can be aligned and there are lots of opportunities for partners among us.
 * I mentioned that CG CRP 4 around nutrition work can be leveraged.
 * Linkages with other programs such as evergreen agriculture, mycotoxins (with BeCa in Nairobi), in CRP 4.3 about food safety  all opportunities that can be seized to avoid reinventing the wheel.
 * In Sub-Saharan Africa, the systems are crop-livestock systems. There are always chickens, goats etc, When working on crops, look at nutritional quality of the crops you’re working on, looking at residues etc. We don’t have to do research again to collate information. Ewen and Peter are there to pull that information to bring it to your project. Your work informs other projects and looking for funding for other projects. Those other projects might become more holistic as a result.
 * Nutritional value of crops for feeds is important, from ILRI/ICRAF/CIMMYT’s perspective. The CSISA program in India is working on the nutritional value of some of these crops.
 * Otherwise, I was very impressed with what you have done here and I can see that this program will have much impact.

Yakobo Msanga (Tanzania Ministry of Livestock)

 * The work you have done is very pleasing. You are working on issues for integrated systems.
 * Integration in crop-livestock is very important. AR is focusing on this. There are fodder crops that can be used.
 * Manure can be used, it is very important.
 * What is missing: Seeds are not just about food crops but also feed crops. We lack seeds for livestock. In addition, we need seeds for livestock.
 * Linkages between projects: we have been working on a BMGF-funded project around legumes. All these projects are focusing on production. We need to link these projects to increase benefits in East Africa. Integrating Africa RISING with those will be beneficial.
 * Intercropping systems. E.g. in case of water shortage, having a small linkage means you are less
 * I hope we are going to integrate with one another in the near future.

Eliawoni Mavandu (Ministry of Agriculture)

 * From yesterday’s visit we have learned a lot. But there is a very big issue of ??
 * We need to have varieties that will be good in the irrigation system. Yesterday we saw some maize planted – of different varieties – now we need to assess which varieties will fare well in which systems.
 * Today we heard a lot about jumpstart projects but there is a lot of activity to start on the ground and we hope that researchers will develop projects to work on.
 * My feeling is that there is a lot of activities in the plans and we need to see how the plans can be trimmed down and decide which ones can be implemented. There are many projects. Perhaps some can start first and others follow later.
 * About sustainability: From the very beginning you need to involve linkage with other projects but also specifically NARS and extension agents to bring sustainability in the future. Once you develop technologies, you need to make sure that the people are ready to embrace these technologies. I am glad you have started on that track but you need to strengthen this in the future. By involving them you will be able to phase out or on in a smoother way. Start thinking about this now.
 * The whole thing is good and I wish you all the best and I hope you will come up with good technologies for our farmers.

Harry Ngoma (USAid Zambia)

 * I have been here for the last 4 days and I see that Africa RISING and the missions are trying to achieve very similar objectives. Both are trying to work in target areas. In Zambia, the FtF has a project with a research component which I am managing myself and 6 other projects. The framework that AR is using is very much compatible with the approach we are using around pop density and access to markets. Target groups are also very similar. There is a lot of room to work together.
 * Following this meeting I look forward to hearing a clear work plan that maybe the Mission can support to leverage resources and achieve impact.
 * The advantage of Zambia is that FtF has various projects that can scale up easily. These projects are around soya beans, maize, sunflowers, ground nuts, horticulture etc. Once research products are available we should share them across projects.
 * I look forward to ongoing collaboration for Africa RISING.

Final words by Mateete Bekunda, Africa RISING lead scientist for the East and Southern Africa region
Thank you for the panelists for having been encouraging and for supporting what we are doing. Most of the issues mentioned will be incorporated in the formulation in the work plans. We are grateful for you to support AR.

One issue that keeps coming up is that of climate change. What we are doing may not give a headline on climate change but it contributes.

Thank you everybody for coming here. My feeling is that this partnership is shaping up. All jumpstart projects were partnerships, both CG and national partners. We are going to work on this together. We are hoping that most of us will be implementing this project. You are ears on the ground to help me and AR.

Once again I am very grateful that you came. We are going to implement our first activities in November. It’s my dream. We have to do it together. I want to wish you a safe journey back home.

Closing statements by Viktor Manyong, IITA director for East Africa
We are now at the end of a journey that started on Monday. During five days you have been working very hard on this important project. When you look back and reflect on Monday you have made a lot of progress. In February, when we had the inception workshop, we were wondering how to develop this project. If you look at the progress that has been made so far, we are not there yet but we have done very good progress. Among year one achievements, we have done a lot of progress with jumpstart projects, guiding the research project, selecting sites and on this point in particular let me tell you that I am very relieved because I interact with donors and policy-makers in the region. It is great that we can work with the USAid mission in the three countries.

We have a comms strategy, an M&E plan and our project has a structure. We did not have this in February. We have a project coordination committee meeting for the first time tomorrow. We have a skeleton for research groups so we have all the components for this program. We have now also a draft program document which very soon will be validated by the different research teams. We have not completed this but very quickly we need to finalize this.

We received feedback from imminent experts which I consider as the demand side: our partners from the different districts. This is the challenge of this program. We need to take these demands and problems identified as the demand we need to respond to.

So we are now at a difficult point: we have made some good progress but there are changes ahead. Partnerships are key as reminded several times. We need to put our resources and brains together and then we can achieve a lot.

On behalf of IITA, I would like to say we are happy with the progress so far. In the near future we will continue to improve on the different issues addressed in this workshop. Those are my reflections about what I heard during this workshop. I look forward to the great achievements of this project.

I would like to thank our donor the USAid FTF program and its staff sent a long way away from Washington for continuing to support us.

I would like to thank all the participants who came to take part to this workshop. Only by working together can we achieve a lot.