Addis_project_boundaries


 * Sustainable intensification of crop-livestock systems to improve food security and farm income diversification in the Ethiopian highlands **
 * Project Design Workshop **
 * 30 January - 2 February 2012, Addis Ababa Ethiopia **

**Group work results / Project boundaries - What not**

This workshop provides an opportunity for a broad group of important stakeholders to both learn about the project plans and to share their views on expectations from and opportunities for synergies with the project (days 1 and 2) and for the core project team to finalize the project details (days 3 and 4).

Presentation by Diego:




 * Our boundaries included scale, sustainable intensification
 * Scale:
 * Decision units are household/farm and communal resources/process
 * Focused scale would be household/farm
 * Sustainable Intensification:
 * The plot is not our focus, farm production is;
 * We look at biophysical / socio-economic drivers but don't do research on it (e.g. climate change could be a driver, we'll include it in the research but will not conduct more research about it);
 * Diversity of households = typologies;
 * We are not focusing on the poorest of the poor (no means to test technologies, it's difficult).
 * Research - development:
 * We will not do reserach on development components (we will improve and combine current technologies). The link is with development, research + policy programs.
 * This is not a value chain project but we have to be aware of it;
 * More integration with national and regional partners.
 * Ideas for R4D:
 * Participatory selection of basket of opportunities;
 * Farmers/communities decide which ones to implement (understanding decision-making, co-learning);
 * Assessment at farm, but also down/up scales. Qualitative and quantitative (difficult) analyses = process & social research (M&E)
 * Note: this is a time demanding process
 * No pilot studies/projects
 * Rather than linking with on-going projects (whose paths might be difficult to change), link with projects at design phase (eg LGP); co-designing and co-learning with partners; Funding institutions' role on leverage for this process; review of coming initiatives/project (site selection); Risk of quick wins - no sustainable unless linked to strong current processes. Better focus on processes than on numbers.


 * Comments**:
 * (on SI) Looking at PSNP, there's a program focusing on direct beneficiaries and we need to look at that group, not the safety net group.
 * (on R4D) household members are in the same scale;
 * The presentation makes us realise that there's a whole sub-part of the project that is much more about institutions - the people around the table are not that sort of people - where is the disconnect. Is this a key part of the project that needs to be addressed?
 * We can't have more than __one__ focused scale.
 * The farm, as the unit, is very different to what we usually as bio-physical scientists - we need to be aware of this.
 * What about the spillover/benefit effects for the poorest of the poor;
 * The word 'development' brings about different images: not crop development but development work. Here we were just saying we were not working on plant breeding. We are also not working on fertilizer response tries.
 * No value chain project because we don't have the resources;
 * Regional here means 'Ethiopian regions' not Eastern Africa region - sub-regional research organizations are important.
 * It's better to focus on development projects at design phase and start working together e.g. LGP.
 * No pilot studies etc.: but we are focusing on farm level so how do we combine this? --> we're not going to sites where there is no other project going on;
 * No link with ongoing projects might be a problem, it's misleading. Many dev projects are flexible and looking for tech options --> the experimental design we foresee will require funding and activities from dev and research projects. We focus on 'basket of technologies', not technologies. This will not be a stand-alone project.
 * The point here is to emphasize the embedding of the research in starting projects.


 * Conclusion: as for other groups, more or less accepted but a group will further revise this text.**