pct23

=Africa RISING PCT meeting #23= 23 June 2017 Arusha, Tanzania

__Participants__: Bernard Vanlauwe (BV) - chair Siboniso Moyo (SM) Peter Thorne (PT) Irmgard Hoeschle-Zeledon (IHZ) Carlo Azzarri (CA) Ewen Le Borgne (ELB) - secretary

PCT page PCT follow-up action points


 * Agenda**
 * 1) Initial check-in with SAG group
 * 2) Update from chief scientists:
 * Plans for cross-project visits and exchanges (linked to the CoPs/annual event) - take lead from chief scientists
 * Data sharing and manuscript oversight: data sharing ethics, sharing and guidelines among project partners.
 * 1) Getting CoP's active + Plans for champions for each major program-wide element and development plans: Si framework, typologies, scaling, program analysis and research questions, capacity development, data management, gender... Possibly addressed at PCT/SAG meeting
 * 2) How do we define and measure 'reach' across the projects and the program. Critical for the phase 2 targets. Possibly addressed at PCT/SAG meeting.
 * 3) Update on recruitments of Comms specialist
 * 4) Update on phase 1 summary document
 * 5) Engagement standards with farmers to review in line with scaling partners' engagement (IHZ)
 * 6) A decision rule for the PCT?
 * 7) SI indicators framework
 * 8) Any other issue from the PCT-SAG meeting?
 * 9) Possible changes with USAID and preparing for it?
 * 10) Publication guidelines
 * 11) AOB?

__**Conversation**__

1. Initial check-in with SAG members
//Summary: SAG and PCT will interact mostly through their chairs but any other interaction is welcome. The theory of change and the program framework of AR form a good basis to structure feedback from the SAG. Interactions before/during/after the annual learning event will be essential. SAG members have a term of 2-3 years.//

The key question is how the SAG interacts with the PCT? How was the science agenda developed? There are two steps: the CoPs with all their issues and the work planning for each country. That's where the detailed planning takes place. The M&E component is another major pillar. There is also a research framework with operating principles.


 * **Q**: Would you expect the SAG to give feedback before or after work plans?
 * **A**: It's usually a table with activities and we have detailed protocols for West Africa and Ethiopian Highlands.
 * It probably would be good it the SAG could take a look at these protocols... But maybe that's too operational?
 * For the external review we set up Dropbox folders. Perhaps we could do that...
 * **Q**: The theory of change you have, could that not be the basis of our interactions? How do regional activities fit into that?
 * **A**: (Bernard) I like the idea of referring to that ToC and program framework.
 * You need to tell us (SAG) what you want feedback on.

Over the first year, does our documentation reflect our work? The presentations we gave don't give a full reflection of what we've done. (SAG) We'd rather reflect on what happened rather than what's planned. Your interactions should be around the ToC/program framework + CoP interactions. The protocols are probably too much detail. Moses: when the external review comes it would be good to share docs with them and us...


 * **Q**: Who is your (SAG) focal point in Africa RISING?
 * **A**: That's on our agenda and your point of contact is the PCT chair.

You can decide the terms of the SAG chair (duration) and it's possible, practically, to renew the term of someone... The plan is to ensure that there is one face-to-face meeting and one virtual one. The annual learning event would be the logical time to have our face-to-face time. The next learning meeting will likely be in January and we should interact with each other a few months before that face-to-face meeting.

2. Update from chief scientists
//Summary: An agenda of cross-project visits with a specific thematic focus was proposed, starting with WA in September-October; in any case partnerships will be key in these visits. Publication guidelines distinguish scientific papers (automatic review by chief scientists) and technical reports (simple clearance from chief scientists and check-up by project coordinator). Co-authorship requirements should be reflected in contracts with scientists. The definition of an 'Africa RISING technology' remains complex. The next attempt at unpacking this will be made in Ethiopia in July and will follow (in WA and Ethiopia) steps undertaken by Mateete in ESA to map the different technologies against SI domains.// First chief scientist meeting in May this year when joining the ToT in Ethiopia. See minutes here: We discussed issues listed in the PCT meeting in Nairobi in April and wrote a report about this meeting.
 * There is no issue about the roles and responsibilities
 * Cross-project visits - specified below
 * Publication best practice guidelines - specified below
 * CoPs and cross-cutting topics - chief scientists suggest waiting for current experiences. Their performance should be monitored over a period of 1 year. Deferred to PCT. A question remains about making budget available for the watershed management. Another issue remains on CoP leadership (especially with socio-economic assessment)
 * Definition of an 'Africa RISING technology' - specified below
 * is a technology or practice that meets requirements for at least 2 (out of 5) SI domains and should be supported/described by a protocol published on the AR website. There should also not be too negative impacts of these technologies.
 * BvL: we need to have an idea of the impact of our technologies. Right now we're measuring uptake of technologies etc. By knowing the impact we know the effect on each domain. Right now we haven't described that possible impact. We need to have the range of values that each technology gets e.g. germplasm and fertilizer will have a different impact in different places. There's an element of 'integrating risk' and we need to give it more thinking.
 * IHZ: What are we really scaling?

For each visit there should be 6-8 weeks' notice and a minimum of 6 participants as it takes time to organise such visits. Participation to confirm 2 weeks before. Each visit will be guided by a theme. PT: Livestock might be a good theme. BvL: I see very different dynamics in each country, related to partnerships etc. and for me that would be an absolute priority to think across countries about what are the issues and challenges and how to move AR to its full second phase. So development partnerships could be a useful theme too. Asamoah: We also have to discuss operational issues on the ground. Regionally there are differences. There are other projects in each region and some of us on the ground know how to approach some of these things. Mateete: In the work plans we have items on engaging with partners so we have to make it happen. The next 3 months are going to be very active meeting with different partners etc. BvL: Partnerships with Technologies for African Agricultural Transformation (TAAT) value chain projects have a lot of potential for the research. CGIAR is leading TAAT.
 * Plans for cross-project visits and exchanges (linked to the CoPs/annual event) - take lead from chief scientists**
 * WA / Ethiopia: September-October. WA to host in Sept-Oct. 2017 and ET to host in Sept-Oct 2018
 * ESA: March-April. ESA to host in March-April 2018

We made a distinction between peer-reviewed journal publications and other technical reports/publications. For the former we use guidelines for authors and all papers should be reviewed by chief scientists before submission to the journal. Chief scientists should be informed of progress with these. For the latter (other technical reports etc.) comms team should get clearance from the chief scientists before publishing any technical report on the AR network. Technical reports are checked by project coordinator. But e.g. success stories are not always relevant.
 * Data sharing and manuscript oversight: data sharing ethics, sharing and guidelines among project partners.**

BvL: If you ask people to send you drafts for your review and you don't review it's not going to continue. And there are fields that you won't be able to comment on etc. Co-authorship should be organised for Africa RISING. Other guidelines need to be more specific but chief scientists need to be contributing or at least aware of publications in the pipeline. And the co-authorship guidelines should be put in the contracts.
 * ACTION: PCT will write to everyone about these guidelines.**

It is a technology or practice that meets requirements for at least 2 (out of 5) SI domains and should be supported/described by a protocol published on the AR website. There should also not be too negative impacts of these technologies.
 * Definition of an 'Africa RISING technology'**
 * BvL: we need to have an idea of the impact of our technologies. Right now we're measuring uptake of technologies etc. By knowing the impact we know the effect on each domain. Right now we haven't described that possible impact. We need to have the range of values that each technology gets e.g. germplasm and fertilizer will have a different impact in different places. There's an element of 'integrating risk' and we need to give it more thinking.
 * IHZ: What are we really scaling? We are not working on single components. We work on packages. Are we promoting the whole package.
 * PT: We can meet with Carlo and other virtual participants to progress with this.
 * SM: We need to have an online conversation that is embedded in the mainstream.
 * AL: When we disseminate we need to ensure we have data.
 * PT: AL, KM/PT should focus on mapping the technologies' potential impact against these different SI domains.
 * IHZ: it's easiest to link with indicators. We need to respond to Jerry about having some 'common indicators' across the programs.
 * BvL: We need core and auxiliary indicators.
 * **ACTION: AL/KM to identify how technologies connect to SI domains by end of July - based on template provided by Mateete.**
 * **ACTION: PT/KM/Gebrehiwot/Beliyou/Carlo and ESA/WA folks to advance this conversation in late July / early August on what an Africa RISING technology is and how AR adds value to that conversation etc.** This will be part of a wider conversation on M&E in Ethiopia. Specific dates to be fixed.


 * ACTION: Chief Scientists to work further with PCT on this - e.g. a concept paper.**

Getting CoP's active + Plans for champions for each major program-wide element and development plans
//Summary: The unfunded CoPs will be formally supported now. All PCT members and sponsors need to be more active in these. CoPs have to get their act together. By September another assessment will be made and by December a decision to continue with some CoPs and in a given way or another, or not, may/will be taken.//

Cross-cutting elements: Si framework, typologies, scaling, program analysis and research questions, capacity development, data management, gender... Possibly addressed at PCT/SAG meeting

On CoPs, we're giving another 6 months. We also agree that all PCT members are going to be more active on these CoPs. The next PCT Meeting will be in late September. In September the PCT reviews progress and in December a decision is made if need be. An action plan and budget should be developed by then. And that's a basis to take a decision (in December) to continue each CoP or not. Dimensions of that decision: What is going to be the content of the task forces? The socio-economic assessment CoP will be left to sleep for now as no candidate is seen as ideal to champion this. The informal CoPs will now become formalised and IITA will fund these two extra ones.
 * formality of a task force vs. informality of a CoP?
 * are the themes the right ones (other themes could be the cross-cutting elements mentioned above)?
 * are the leaders the right ones?
 * ACTION: CoP champions need to give us an update before the next PCT meeting - or join the September PCT meeting for 30'.**
 * ACTION: all PCT members to be more active on these CoPs.**
 * ACTION: IHZ to approach Jeroen and Lulseged to become formal CoP champions.**
 * ACTION: IHZ to engage with the landscape/watershed management and BvL to engage with the virtual farming CoP.**

How do we define and measure 'reach' across the projects and the program. Critical for the phase 2 targets
This was addressed in the PCT/SAG meeting.

Update on recruitments of Comms specialist
Two good candidates are being interviewed and that process should be completed by the end of next week. In the interim etc. Ewen is the focal point for program comms for Africa RISING.

Update on phase 1 summary document
Are we still going for this summary document? It's an important document and a lot of work has gone into it. We need to finalize it. JO had a write in mind.
 * ACTION: ELB and JO to work on the summary document - very good draft done by September PCT meeting.**

Engagement standards with farmers to review in line with scaling partners' engagement (IHZ)
Deferred to another PCT meeting.

A 'decision rule' for the PCT?
Skipped - no need to change anything about decision making in the PCT.

SI indicators framework
Discussed earlier on. The SIIL contribution to this will continue with MSU after August. Africa RISING will be using and testing the SI framework indicators. This work will continue with another agreement. We need to facilitate links between what we are doing and what Vara is doing with SIIL. If there is a community of practice on this we should be part of that.
 * ACTION: PT to check with Vara what the feedback mechanism is to collect information on other innovation labs implementing this framework by 23 June.**

**Any other issue from the PCT-SAG meeting?** We need to hear what the SAG is proposing and to see whether this is doable. We need to set the dates for the next learning and review meeting.
 * ACTION: ELB to set up Doodle in the first 3 weeks of February for a meeting in Ghana (Accra) and send it to PCT/SAG members and CoP champions**

Possible changes with USAID and preparing for it?
We have to wait for this, until they have revised their focus countries.

**Publication guidelines** There are many guidelines that exist on co-authorship. Do we circulate them to see if they make sense for our publications. This is about scientific papers. In September we should adopt publication guidelines.
 * ACTION: BvL to circulate publication guidelines to make them relevant for Africa RISING - all PCT members to review and guidelines to be published in September**

Preparing report back from this meeting + closing the meeting
Here are the points to report back:
 * CoPs: adding the 2 new CoPs formally and we review progress in September.
 * Reach: part of the CoP work for Haroon.
 * Summary document: we need to make it happen by September (leadership with Jonathan)
 * Progress with SI: Clarifications to make with SIIL on their expected activities with the SI framework and how to collect feedback and a meeting is planned on M&E in Ethiopia and it will also address the SI indicators framework.
 * Publication guidelines: By September we'll have these (full process on scientific publications).
 * Posting all events online.
 * Learning event Accra first 3 weeks of February.
 * Looking forward to very cordial relationships with the SAG.

Do we really make these changes that we promise to make?
We should expect that all outputs from our events are shared publicly. We need to redouble our efforts to engage with partners.
 * ACTION: BvL to remind all chief scientists and copied to PCT that all events are posted on the wiki events list with expected outputs (relevant minutes)**