More meat, milk, and fish by and for the poor: CGIAR Research Program 3.7

More meat, milk, and fishby and for the poor

Presented to the 2nd Multi-stakeholder Platform MeetingAgenda for Action for Sustainable Livestock Sector Development

Phuket2 December 2011

CGIAR Research Program 3.7

CGIAR Change process

Perceived lack of impact

Lack of focus, inefficiencies

Lack of funding stability

New! CGIAR Consortium & Fund Council

CGIAR Research Programs

Transition ongoing

Outline of Presentation

CGIAR Change process

Purpose of consultation

CRP3.7 Concept

Operationalizing CRP3.7

CRP3.7 on Livestock & Fish

April-May 2010: Concept note

June-Sept 2010:

Proposal development

Stakeholder consultation

Feb-May 2011: Comments and revisions

July 2011: Fund Council approves with

‘light adjustments’

Official start: January 2012

Purpose for this consultation

Stakeholders shaped CRP3.7 proposal FARA meeting in July 2010

Stakeholder meeting in August 2010

E-consultation June 2010-June 2011

Continue spirit of consultation now CRP3.7 has been approved

How are we planning to implement CRP3.7?

How are we addressing environmental concerns

Goal

More meat, milk and fish by and for the poor

To sustainably increase the productivity of small-scale livestock and fish systems to increase the availability and affordability of animal-source-foods for poor consumers and, in doing so, reduce poverty through greater participation by the poor along the whole value chains for animal-source foods.

Goal

More meat, milk and fish … for the poor

To sustainably increase the productivity of small-scale livestock and fish systems to increase the availability and affordability of animal-source-foods for poor consumers and, in doing so, reduce poverty through greater participation by the poor along the whole value chains for animal-source foods.

Goal

More meat, milk and fish by … the poor

To sustainably increase the productivity of small-scale livestock and fish systems to increase the availability and affordability of animal-source-foods for poor consumers and, in doing so, reduce poverty through greater participation by the poor along the whole value chains for animal-source foods.

Consumers

Past research has focused specific aspectsof given value chains, commodities and country.

Consumers

...in Country A

Consumers

Consumers

...in Country D

...in Country C

...in Country B

Basic Idea: Solution-driven R4D to achieve impact

Traditional approach was piecemeal

Consumers

R4D integrated to transform selected value chains In targeted commodities and countries.

Value chain development team + research partners

We propose a focus on integrated value-chains for bigger impact . . .

Approach: Solution-driven R4D to achieve impact

Strategic CRP 3.7 Cross-cutting Platforms• Technology Generation• Market Innovation• Targeting & Impact

Consumers

R4D integrated to transform selected value chains In targeted commodities and countries.

Value chain development team + research partners

GLOBAL RESEARCH PUBLIC GOODS

INTERVENTIONS TO SCALE OUT REGIONALLY

. . . combined with strategic cross-cutting platforms for scaling out.

Major intervention with development partners

Approach: Solution-driven R4D to achieve impact

Getting to impact

Serving as Knowledge Partner in development interventions

Goal: catalyze large-scale intervention to transform target value chain

Smart design

Generate convincing evidence

Attract investment

1 Technology development:

− Genetics− Feeds− Health

Consumers

Commodity X in Country Y

2 Value chain development

3 Targeting: Foresight, prioritization, gender, impact assessment

Cross-cutting: M&E, communications, capacity building

Delivering CRP3.7 Livestock + Fish

Structure: Three integrated Components

9 Target Value Chains

PIGS

AQUACULTURE

SHEEP & GOATS

DAIRY

3-year Budget Envelope by Center

TOTAL = US$99.6 million

3-year Budget Envelope by Component

TOTAL = US$99.6 million

Initial Work Plan: Technology Development

Animal health, genetics, feeds: Assess constraints from pro-poor value chain lens Identify best-bet interventions

Animal health Continued work on key diseases: ECF, CBPP,

PPR, African Swine fever Livestock and fish genetics

Community-breeding schemes, fish improvement programs

Feeds Improved food-feed crops, forages

Initial Work Plan: Value chain development

Frameworks, tools for VC assessment Link to CRP2 led by IFPRI

Partner engagement – R&D alliances Site selection process Rapid and in-depth VC assessment Situational analysis Testing & generating evidence for best-bet

interventions Action-research to get to solutions Conventional trials to ensure credible

evidence

Initial Work Plan:Targeting, gender, M&E

Targeting GIS and trend analysis of target value chains

regionally and nationally

Gender & equity Tools and reviews Priority interventions

M&E and impact assessment Frameworks and indicators

Environmental concerns

Growing value chains will have environmental implications Expanded carbon footprint, more GHG Stress on eco-services, degradation Social: over-consumption of animal-

source foods?

Good: improved productivity reduces GHG/unit product

Actions to addressenvironmental concerns

Articulate Environment strategy(as addendum to proposal)

NEW! Environmental impact assessment

1 Technology development:

− Genetics− Feeds− Health

Consumers

Commodity X in Country Y

2 Value chain development

3 Targeting: Foresight & prioritization, gender, impact assessment

Cross-cutting: M&E, communications, capacity building

Environment Component added

Structure: Three integrated Components

Actions to addressenvironmental concerns

Articulate Environment strategy

Add Environment Component to structure

Trade-off analysis for water, land and biomass use

Appropriately adapted Life Cycle Analysis for value chain (ex. WF study)

Environmental monitoring plan

Evaluate implications of proposed technologies and value chain interventions

Relevance for the Agenda of Action

Closing the efficiency gap

improving productivity in small-scale systems

Grasslands ??

Reduced discharge – manure management

easier to manage in small-scale systems as integrated crop-livestock production or with manure as a marketable by-product

CRP 4

Discussion Points1. Does our approach on environmental

issues adequately address your thematic areas?

2. Are we missing other key environmental concerns?

3. What lessons can you offer on how research can better work with development partners to stimulate pro-poor value chain development?

4. Obviously the private sector is key to sustainability of our target value chains. What have we learned about research successfully engaging the private sector? Examples?

More meat, milk and fishby and for the poor

We wish to thank FAO for allowing this opportunity to consult with our core

stakeholders