external image 5187103097_76f0d398ca_m.jpg
Final workshop15-19 November 2010Luang Prabang, People’s Democratic Republic of Laos
Objectives of the meeting:

- Review what has been achieved during the project life in relation to what was planned at the outset
- Set FAP research in the wider context of current thinking on feed in intensifying smallholder systems
- Specifically review the innovation systems aspects of the project and discuss the extent to which such approaches are useful

Joining instructions


Some photos

Presentations

Participants List


PROGRAMME

S.No.
Activity
Time

Day 1

1
Opening Remarks and welcome – Tassilo Tienmann
Objectives of the meeting – Alan Duncan
08:30- 09:00
2
Introduction of the participants and ice breaker– Peter Ballantyne
09:00 – 09:20
3
Overview of the project – Alan Duncan NOTES / PRESENTATION / BLOGPOST
09:20 – 09:40

Some words from the donor - Antonio Rota
09:40-10:00
4
Coffee Break
10:00 – 10:30
5
Reporting back on Output 1 – Mechanisms for strengthening and/or establishing multi-stakeholder alliances that enable scaling up and out of fodder technologies
Presentations with discussion - Chaired by Mohammed Abdullah

NOTES



Vietnam PRESENTATION / CASE STUDY
10:30-11.00

Syria PRESENTATION
11:00-11:30

Ethiopia PRESENTATION
11:30-12:00

General Discussion
12.00-12.30
6
Lunch
12:30 -14:00
7
Reporting back on Output 2 – Options for effective delivery systems including innovative communication strategies and on farm interventions to improve fodder supply
Presentations with discussion - Chaired by Nguyen Ngoc Anh

NOTES



Vietnam PRESENTATION / CASE STUDY
14:00-14:30

Syria PRESENTATION
14:30-15:00

Ethiopia PRESENTATION
15:00-15:30

General Discussion
15:30-16:00
9
Coffee break
16:00 – 16:15
10
Beneficiaries views of FAP - participatory video from Ethiopia BLOGPOST / VIDEO
16:15 – 17:00

Steering Committee Business Meeting
17:00 - 17.45

Day 2

11
Reporting back on Output 3 – Enhanced capacity of project partners to experiment with and use fodder innovations through effective communication, technical information and training in diverse aspects placing fodder interventions in the context of systems of innovation.
Presentations with discussion - Chaired by Tassilo Tiemann

NOTES / BLOGPOST



Vietnam PRESENTATION / CASE STUDY
08:30 – 09:00

Syria PRESENTATION
09:00 – 09:30

Ethiopia PRESENTATION
09:30 – 10:00

General Discussion
10:00 – 10.30
12
Coffee Break
10:30 – 11:00
13
Cross-cutting thematic areas – what have we learned?

World Cafe format - collective learning across themes

Three facilitators distill the key points from the previous sessions - as conversation starters.
- Innovation approaches - Ranjitha Puskur VIDEO INTERVIEW / BLOGPOST
- Feed assessment - Michael Blummel VIDEO INTERVIEW / BLOGPOST
- Scaling out - Werner Stur VIDEO INTERVIEW / BLOGPOST

Participants cluster around tables where the facilitators share back their initial reflections to the table group. Thereafter, a process of collective learning where the facilitator captures the group discussion points. After 20 minutes, participants move to a second table. Session ends with plenary reporting back by the facilitators. In the break, we capture the main points 'youtube' style.


NOTES / BLOGPOST (alan)

11:00 – 12:30
14
Lunch
12.30-13.30

15
Output 4. Identifying Generic Lessons

Peer assist format:Focused on two issue areas: Site selection; Policy/institutional environment.

We start with three country representatives (Kebebe, Asamoah, Tasillo) VERY briefly presenting 2 slides each on issues related to site selection and policy/institutional environment for the FAP in their countries.

After, participants form three groups and, using a hypothetical country, the presenters each role play someone seeking to start a new FAP-like program, and seeking generic guidance on site selection and/or policy/institutional environment. They pose a question or problem that the table participants will help answer/solve. Each table will generate a list of generic lessons/answers that can be shared back in plenary.


NOTES / BLOGPOST (Keith)

13:30 – 14:30
16
Coffee
15:00 – 15:30
18
Final plenary and wrap up.

First phase: Four "externals": IFAD, SLP, ILRI, FIP - provide 3-4 minute reflections in plenary. What is the significance of this project? Food for discussion.

Shirley Tarawali on the fodder adoption project: We can congratulate everyone for managing the 'tension' between innovation system approaches and technology development. Welcomes the focus on a commodity - fodder - as opposed to more general animal production issues. Still a lot of questions - around innovation systems for example, and what is measured in such approaches. Lots going on in such a project that are not caught by the more conventional project indicators. The project provides good insights into the intersection between value chains and development processes. The new CGIAR livestock and fish mega program will surely benefit from this project as it encounters problems in addressing value chains and technology development.

Ranjitha Puskur on the fodder adoption project: Speaking from FIP perspective (www.fodderinnovation.org) much valued the insights into the marriage of technological and institutional innovation in the project. Really good and useful insights generated by the countries - MUST capture and document these. Project shows up the need for much research on how we monitor and evaluate such innovation system projects. Next time, such a project might want to include more socio-economic expertise.

Bruno Gerard on the fodder adoption project: Has been a very challenging project - in 3 countries characterized by different development challenges, also institutional environments (Ethiopia, Syria, Vietnam). Is an interesting project on content and process. "My first workshop was not as rich as this one in terms of content and learning... they just get better!" Some weaker areas: GIS and spatial data, impact assessment, ... The scaling out is a very interesting and relevant issue. The experiences in this project look to be very relevant to the emerging CGIAR research programs. Looking forward to the outputs and publications still to come (echoed by Antonio Rota).

Antonio Rota (IFAD) on the fodder adoption project: He much values this project. He is inspired by the discussions and the learning shared. Logframe suggests there was more networking between the centers and project teams envisaged. In general, this is "what we consider a very successful grant" .. and I look forward to continuing this collaboration - even if it is just through knowledge management tools. But it will be a pity to lose this group.

Second phase: Quick buzz groups (5 mins) among participants to reflect on what went well, what didn't go so well? What could be done better next time? Shout out and collect them on a flip chart.

Followed by plenary conversation.

After Acton Review of the Project as a whole - Strengths and Weaknesses

positive aspects

team 2 team country visits and learning
communication tools and web
good external project linkages
FEAST
team learning
ongoing learning
innovative approach engaging farmers to policy
capacity bulding
networking
big positive impact
good stakeholder relations - country level
bringing staqkeholders together
inter-center partnership


could do better aspects
what about gender and environment assessment?
lack of exit strategy
top down technology
private sector involvement
limited time for country coordination
more communications for advocacy, earlier
socio-economic integration
role and presence of SLP for inter-center integration (after initial catalyzing role)
not enough nontechnical innovations
conceptual evolution of project after conception


After Action Review of the 2-day workshop

positive aspects

luang prabang as a location, food, walking, collective dinners, etc
no phones disturbing
focused, rich discussions
good facilitation
world cafe style
good timekeeping
relaxed, informal
balance between presentations and groups
well-planned
donor involvement


could do better aspects
clash with eid mubarak holiday
whole week to long?
building noise outside

Final words from Alan, Antonio

NOTES - Seife has some
15:30 - 1700



Day 3

Field visit

Day 4

Feed in Smallholder Systems - symposium


IntroductionBLOGPOST (peter)
NOTES (morning and afternoon discussion - Alan)
BLOGPOST (synthesis - Keith)
09:00
Sustainable livestock intensification in smallholder systems – where does feed fit and how can current constraints be overcome? – Alan Duncan PRESENTATION

Feeds and forages as inputs to livestock systems – 7 slide/7 minute presentations - Chaired by Lucy Lapar5 quick/structured presentations(slide 1: what is the key issue, 3 slides on what we know/what has been done, one slide on gaps, work to be done still. Last slide on key message from the review. 1 open slide to be chosen by presenter)
09:30
What is available – an example of development of a national feed inventory - Dr Sampath (National Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology) PRESENTATION

Where do different feed options fit - Biophysical niches in Ethiopia – Diriba Geleti PRESENTATION

Supplementary/compounded feeding in Kenyan and Indian dairy systems – why so little? – Ben Lukuyu and Michael Blummel PRESENTATION

Farmer-participatory research and development for improving feed supply and use - Asamoah Larbi PRESENTATION

Livestock feed as a component of smallholder systems: trade-offs in biomass use- Bruno Gerard (including SLP CR study) PRESENTATION
10:30
Coffee
11:00
Group work Participants form 5 groups around the different speakers according to interest. Groups identify some questions to pose to the speaker

The groups re-form for 2nd topic/speaker. At the end ,each speaker briefly summarizes the questions/answers they discussed.
12:30
Lunch

Feeds and forages in the context of livestock value chains – 7 slide/7 minute presentations - chaired by Iain Wright5 quick/structured presentations
14:00
Feed as a component of value chains. Shirley Tarawali (including WB study). PRESENTATION

Linking fodder to livestock markets - Werner Stür and Truong tan Khanh PRESENTATION

Fodder innovation in smallholder systems – Ranjitha Puskur – findings from FIP PRESENTATION

Using stakeholder platforms to enhance local innovation in the livestock sector – Kebebe Ergano and Alan Duncan PRESENTATION

Innovation processes in different national contexts - Seife Ayele – FAP meta-analysis PRESENTATION
15:00
Coffee
15:30
Group work as for morning session


Day 5


8.30 - 10.00: Communicating the FAP materials – led by Keith Sones NOTES

10.00-10.30 : coffee

11.00-12.45 Session on Innovation Approaches – led by Shirley Tarawali BLOGPOST

Scene-setting presentation by Shirley Tarawali

Group work: As a device to dig deeper and better understand the strengths and weaknesses of innovation systems in reality, participants spent the remainder of the time in groups working on four assignments:

  • Outline the content of a poster for a national agricultural research meeting explaining the pros and cons of innovation systems principles OUTPUT ; innovations_poster.jpg
  • Draft the key bullet points of a powerpoint presentation to the international animal feed congress explaining the opportunities and challenges of using innovation systems principles OUTPUT
  • Prepare the principal points to include in a policy brief for your Minister of Agriculture outlining the value and relevance of an innovation systems principles OUTPUT ; innovations_policy_brief1.jpg
  • Prepare a text box to describe new innovation systems principles to be included in a new livestock value chain proposal explaining its benefits, and possible challenges OUTPUT


12.45-13.45: Lunch

13.45-14.15: Synthesis of Symposium key messages (Keith Sones) BLOGPOST

14.15-14.30: After action review of the symposium

positive elements

  • good learning opportunity
  • dynamic/nice process
  • short presentations and good discussions
  • the facilitation
  • keith's summary
  • luang prabang
  • icebreakers
  • the rotating (world cafe style) group discussions
  • the 4 products exercise
  • learning about innovation systems

Things to do better next time
  • not enough pre-information for participants
  • capture the richness of the discussions better
  • need handouts as well
  • need to better focus some of the discussions - the speakers may need to be better facilitators!