DRYLAND CEREALS Annual Report 2014.pdf

DRYLAND CEREALS Annual Report 2014

1 | P a g e


2 | P a g e

CGIAR RESEARCH PROGRAM ON DRYLAND CEREALS

PERFORMANCE MONITORING REPORT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2014

A. KEY MESSAGES The year 2014 saw further progress in the CGIAR Research Program on Dryland Cereals in planning and implementing towards impact, streamlining research to deliver on existing demand, further integration of gender-relevant research in the program, capacity development, strengthening existing partnerships, and identifying new strategic alliances. The program, which officially started in July 2012, completed 2.5 years at the end of 2014, building on the foundations of historical research and partnerships of participating CG Centers, and gradually instilling the culture of demand-driven research and holistic address of the delivery pipeline. A Senior Scientist for Gender Research and a Program Manager joined Dryland Cereals during the year, the latter sharing 50% time with Grain Legumes. A Commissioned Grants program was launched in 2014 with intended transition to a Commissioned/Competitive Grants program in 2015. The extension proposal (2015-16) was approved with a ranking of four amongst fifteen CRPs, and response to review comments was accepted by the Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) and the Consortium Office (CO). The structure of the program was modified in the Plan of Work and Budget for 2014, in consultation with the CO, by rearranging the Strategic Components and Product Lines of the original proposal to constitute a product delivery pipeline composed of five Flagships, each addressing seven crop- and region-based clusters of activities. These Flagships are Priority Setting & Adoption, Improved Varieties & Hybrids, Integrated Crop Management, Seed Systems & Input Services, and Postharvest Value & Output Markets. This organization has helped to identify critical expertise, activities and partnerships required for the conduct of need-based research, and its availability to and utilization by smallholder farmers. Demand for dryland cereals remains stable or growing in the target countries of the program, and there is significant opportunity in designing and executing research and development to meet this demand. Increasing crop productivity and enabling small-holder adoption of improved technologies require both focused implementation and budgets that match scope. These two, together with optimal staffing, are our remaining challenges in executing for impact.

Productivity of our resilient, micronutrient-rich target crops has not kept pace with prevailing demand in most target countries, due to the low-input agriculture under which they are traditionally grown, and due to the lower global investment on crop improvement and agronomic research in these crops relative to the major crops. More recently, hybrids, alone or combined with improved agronomic practices, are showing significant potential for productivity enhancements in the case of sorghum and pearl millet in Africa. The yield advantage for hybrids of these crops is at least 20% greater than open-pollinated varieties. In Mali alone, following the initial demonstration of hybrid yield advantages for sorghum over the last four years, and the demand, hybrid seed production reached 40 tons in 2013 for 2014 planting. Of this, 25 tons were produced by farmer seed-producers’ cooperatives working with ICRISAT-managed projects. Pearl millet hybrids already available in India were tested in Tanzania and Kenya to show both adaptability and yield advantage for the second consecutive year, with 12 of 36 tested hybrids demonstrating at least 20% yield advantage over the local check in 2014. Thus, contributing to, and paving the way, for the availability of high-performing hybrids of sorghum and pearl millet in Africa has been one significant achievement for the year. Re-evaluation and adjustment of the Morocco Green Plan by the Moroccan Ministry of Agriculture to include barley seed production, for national food security, is another critical achievement.

In India, improved post-rainy sorghum varieties and technologies were disseminated to about 300,000 farmers in Maharashtra by the end of 2014 under the bilateral project, Harnessing Opportunities for Productivity Enhancements (HOPE) in sorghum and millets, supported by the Bill &

http://1drv.ms/1zs1Nmv

http://1drv.ms/1zs3gt0

http://1drv.ms/1bgDXyw


3 | P a g e

Melinda Gates Foundation during 2009-2013, with 35-40% and 20% increases, respectively, in grain and stover yields in participating farmers’ fields. This constitutes a second significant achievement of the program.

Also noteworthy is the demonstration, under the prevailing conditions of low-input agriculture, of the concepts of (1) seed treatment of barley and pearl millet with Celest Top and/or Apron Star 42WS for improved plant stand and yield advantage, and (2) successful biological control of the pearl millet head miner through the release of parasitoid wasps. Both concepts are in the early stages of development. Finally, according to ICARDA’s decentralization plan, work on barley was completed using satellite stations at Terbol, Lebanon; Sanliurfa and Ankara, Turkey; and Toluca and Obregon, Mexico. Central research activities such as generation advances, nurseries and trials were conducted in Morocco. Detailed technical reports for individual Clusters of Activities of Dryland Cereals are available here.

Overall financial summary: Cumulative Financial Summary (Report L101)

B. IMPACT PATHWAY AND INTERMEDIATE DEVELOPMENT OUTCOMES (IDOS) The impact pathway of the program is aligned along the product delivery pipeline, and involves activities streamlined to contribute towards five intermediate development outcomes (IDOs). The targeted IDOs, as pertinent to the four dryland cereals crops, are improved productivity; increased and stable access to food, feed and fodder; increased consumption; increased and more equitable income; and increased adaptability to environmental variability. Baseline reports are complete for most target countries, while some remain yet to be addressed. Indicators and metrics for the Dryland Cereal IDOs over a ten-year period are identified in the IDO document, and the rationale supporting the metrics is accessible here. The IDOs for this extension phase are intrinsically related to the IDOs and sub-IDOs of the second phase, which in turn are related to the Sustainable Development Goas of the United Nations. The Theory of Change for the program in general, and for the Dryland Cereals Gender Strategy, remains generic currently, even as we work towards defining specific theories of change around country- and region-based strategies at the cropping and farming systems level.

C. PROGRESS ALONG THE IMPACT PATHWAY C1. Progress towards outputs

The year 2014 was rich in outputs as rigor of implementation aligned better with streamlined goals. Only selected outputs are reported here, and individual reports provide the fuller list.

Flagship Project 1 - Priority Setting & Adoption: The naming of this flagship was changed from “Data, Knowledge and Communications” as proposed earlier, to “Priority Setting & Adoption”, without reducing the embedded activities identified in the extension proposal. Baseline surveys for barley in India indicate that the surveyed districts of Bhiwani and Sirsa of Haryana had a surge in area under barley post 2004-05, primarily as a result of the introduction of contract farming in these districts. Survey results from Morocco, which ranks first in food barley consumption in the world, revealed that 99% of surveyed farmers use local varieties, while improved varieties are desirable to more than 50%. Lack of seed availability and information are constraints to adoption. Country-level baseline reports on sorghum and millets are

(b) Actual Expenses - Cumulative (c) Variance - Cumulative

CentersWindows

1 & 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds

Total

Funding

Windows

1 & 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds

Total

Funding

Windows

1 & 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds

Total

FundingICARDA * 5,594 102 3,672 - 9,368 5,091 89 1,647 - 6,828 503 13 2,025 - 2,540

ICRISAT ** 14,968 9,217 23,557 - 47,742 14,540 6,933 16,675 - 38,148 428 2,284 6,882 - 9,594

GCP - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 20,562 9,319 27,229 - 57,110 19,631 7,022 18,322 - 44,976 931 2,297 8,907 - 12,134

Percentage 36% 16% 48% 0% 100% 44% 16% 41% - 100% 8% 19% 73% 0% 100%

*Added Infrastructure Budget of US $ 732k and Actual US $229k

** Including PMU

(a) Total POWB budget since inception

http://1drv.ms/1bgEFvD

http://1drv.ms/1Esee0r

http://1drv.ms/1bgDPPm

http://1drv.ms/1FzcGUs

http://1drv.ms/1IpPLvP

http://1drv.ms/1Esee0r

http://1drv.ms/1bgEY9G


4 | P a g e

complete for almost all target countries through activities of the HOPE project. These, together with the ongoing development of country strategies under ICRISAT leadership, is paving the way to identify demand-driven priorities, determine metrics for success, and define implementation plans, at the country level. This will feed into the development of CRP Phase II proposals.

Value chain analysis of sorghum beer in Kenya identified that zero excise duty allowed the sorghum-based beer, Senator Keg, to become the best-selling beer of East African Breweries, with benefits to sorghum grain producers. Following the 50% excise duty imposed in 2013, sales of Senator Keg fell by an estimated 80%. In the long-term, the future of sorghum beer in Kenya depends on growth in income per head, while in the short term it depends on reduced excise duty to match affordability to low-income consumers. An impact study conducted with 563 pearl millet growers in the Indian states of Gujarat, Rajasthan and UP indicated that improved hybrids based on ICRISAT-bred hybrid parents covered more than 50% area in 2013-14, a direct tribute to the Hybrid Parent Research Consortium of ICRISAT that has been in operation in India since the year, 2000. Impact assessment for the HOPE project years, 2009 to 2013, in Mali indicated 26% increased pearl millet production, increased food consumption score from 51.50 to 54.06, and reduced food insecurity from 24% farmers to 10% farmers. The study also identified increased sorghum area planted per farmer in project sites, with hybrids covering an average of 2 ha per hybrid grower. Although much of the research underlying this impact was completed before the CRP was started, they endorse the emphases and direction taken by the CRP to date.

Flagship Project 2 – Improved Varieties & Hybrids: During 2014, the number of elite lines/varieties of finger millet, pearl millet and sorghum that entered national advanced/performance trials was 400, 508 and 1265, respectively, in the target countries of the program. In the case of barley, 575 advanced lines with higher level of tolerance to abiotic and biotic stresses were shared with partners from the low-input (200), high-input (297) and winter barley (78) programs. Crossing blocks established for the low-input (269) and high-input (276) breeding programs in Morocco and Lebanon were updated with the heat-tolerant lines SBYT14-1, SBYT14-27, and SBYT14-9 identified in 2014. About 360 highly drought-tolerant barley lines identified from more than 2000 advanced breeding lines were increased for international trials and nurseries, and selected drought tolerant genotypes were shared with partners. The barley germplasm collection saw the addition of 31 accessions of landraces and 75 accessions of wild relatives, some from stress-prone and marginal habitats. In addition, 77 accessions of landraces and wild relatives were received from Jordan (NCARE). Towards effective utilization of available barley genetic resources, FIGS subsets were developed for resistance to the yellow dwarf virus, drought and powdery mildew.

Two finger millet accessions out of 63 tested in Uganda and four out of 25 tested in Kenya were identified as resistant to blast. Eight finger millet accessions were selected for inclusion in the multi-trait regional trial based on yield and resistance to Striga. Five finger millet accessions with potential for drought tolerance, good agronomics and yield were identified for inclusion in Participatory Variety Trials (PVT) in the drier finger millet growing areas of Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya. Genetic diversity analysis, using 20 SSR markers, applied to 381 finger millet accessions collected from Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania under the Bio Innovate project indicated significant unexploited diversity.

Genome sequencing of pearl millet was completed, and analysis is in progress. Experimental pearl millet varieties were created for West and Central Africa (WCA), with combinations of host plant resistance to Striga hermonthica and Sclerospora graminicola, together with good grain yield. Sixteen fully male-fertile and phenotypically distinct hybrid combinations were identified for further evaluation in 2015 in WCA. Three of forty tested genotypes showed improved resistance to head miner, and three of eighteen tested in lysimetric studies showed better performance under low soil

http://1drv.ms/1P8SedM

http://1drv.ms/1bgE6C7


5 | P a g e

phosphorus conditions. Genotyping and phenotyping of about 1000 pearl millet hybrid parents were completed in India to identify heterotic pools. Two consecutive years (2013, 2014) of testing of hybrids developed in India for adaptability and yield performance in Tanzania demonstrated both adaptability and at least 20% grain yield advantage over local open-pollinated varieties. Large genetic variation for transpiration efficiency was found in the pearl millet inbred germplasm association panel, opening the possibility of using some of these as donors in breeding.

The sorghum program in Mali, in collaboration with IER and CIRAD, made good progress towards improving phenotyping efficiency, and the numbers of progenies being phenotyped for suitability to low soil phosphorus rose by a factor of five. A Regional Sorghum Hybrid Trial in Kenya including 25 hybrids identified four as superior performers, and a participatory hybrid selection trial with three hybrids repeated in Tanzania for the second time in 2014 resulted in the selection of two farmer-preferred hybrids. Of 81 medium-maturing sorghum lines tested at Kiboko, Kenya, thirteen were identified for drought tolerance and yield potential for the dry lowlands, and one (ICSV 24029 SH) with high yield and tolerance to leaf disease and Striga was identified for promotion and entry into National Performance Trial (NPT) in 2015, targeting the sub-humid agro-ecologies (Lake Victoria zone). Genotyping by Sequencing, followed by Genome-Wide Association Studies, involving roughly 100 sorghum lines associated SNP markers with anthracnose or leaf blight resistance. For post-rainy sorghum in India, ten shoot-fly and grain-mold resistant parents were identified, the bio-fortified sorghum line, ICSR 14001, entered national testing, and two new hybrids were identified for high yield and high Fe and Zn based on multi-location testing.

Flagship Project 3 – Integrated Crop Management: Drip and sprinkler irrigation systems are being tested for barley in Morocco and India. Seed treatment with Celest Top and/or Apron Star 45WS was identified as an important component of Integrated Pest Management in barley for reduced incidence of Barley Yellow Dwarf Virus – PAV and Barley Stem Saw Fly, and reduction of associated yield losses. The most favourable nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer recommendation for optimal finger millet yield relative to cost of production in the finger-millet growing regions of Shalla, Ethiopia, was identified to be 23 kg ha-1 which is equivalent to the micro-dose rate of fertilizer application. Phosphorus recommendation for the Bomet, Nakuru and Kaibatek counties of Kenya was identified to be 60 kg P2O5 ha-1. Finger millet, a crop that accumulates roughly seven-fold more calcium than other cereals, was shown to have location dependency in the accumulation of calcium, zinc and iron. Trials for more than four years identified three different best-bet fertilizer management options for pearl millet in the lowest fertility regions in Niger: a) 6 g NPK + 300 g manure per hill for highest grain yields; (b) 2 g DAP + 200 g manure per hill at sowing + 1 g urea per hill at stem elongation time for satisfactory grain yields; and (c) average input levels of 3 g NPK + 200 g manure per hill or 6 g NPK + 100 g manure per hill for nearly doubled grain yield relative to the no-input control. Intercropping of sorghum with cowpea and with green gram showed relatively better advantage than maize-bean intercropping in eastern Kenya.

Flagship Project 4 – Seed Systems & Input Services: Breeder seed for 8 barley varieties (1.47 t) and 18 barley varieties (11 t) were produced, respectively, in Ethiopia and Morocco. Finger millet seed mini-packs of 0.5 kg were distributed for the varieties U15 (2000 packs) and P224 (2000 bags) in western Kenya. In 2014, about 51.2 tons of different seed classes of 15 pearl millet varieties were produced at ICRISAT, Sadore. At ICRISAT, Kano, about 2.4 t of foundation seed of the pearl millet variety, Super-Sosat, was produced. In India, the Pearl Millet Hybrid Parents Research Consortium for 2014-2018 has been formed with 24 seed companies. About 500 kg breeder seed of pearl millet was produced and distributed to partners in India for seed parents (ICMA/B 93333, ICMA/B 04999, ICMA 94555) of promising hybrids with drought adaptation. For sorghum in WCA, 40 kg breeder seed of four varieties, and 3.5 t of foundation seed of three varieties were produced at three research stations. The demand for seed


6 | P a g e

of improved sorghum varieties from the Rombo and Kondoa districts of Tanzania was high in 2014, and 3144 (62.9%) of the 5000 mini-packs distributed were sold. Breeder seed for post-rainy sorghum in India, produced by partners, was sufficient to plant 2500 ha in 2014 for the production of certified seed.

Flagship Project 5 – Postharvest Value & Output Markets: Market surveys of food barley products conducted in Morocco and Ethiopia identified flat bread and couscous as the predominant barley products in Morocco, while feed uses varied from grain and straw to biomass grazing, hay forage and silage. In Ethiopia, food and malt uses were identified to be the most important. Significant potential was identified for hydroponic barley as a quality feed for livestock in both Morocco and Ethiopia. Results of the study prompted the identification of two associations of rural women to start pilot activities on hydroponic barley, with potential expansion to the production of homemade barley bread in Morocco and Besso in Ethiopia. Following nutrient profiling of the finger millet mini core collection in East and Southern Africa, accessions high in the different nutrients together with three improved varieties (U15, P224 and Ikhulule) and a local check were constituted into a nutrient-dense kit and distributed among partners in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia. Micronutrient analysis in WCA is now addressed by a newly installed XRF machine at ICRISAT-Sadore, with significant enhancement in the analytical throughput for grain and fodder quality. Significant genetic variability was identified for the shelf-life of pearl millet flour based on rancidity factor determined by an acid value and a peroxide value, and blanching of grain was shown to increase shelf life by one month, a technique that was imparted in training of 200 women farmers in the Gujarat and Rajasthan states of India. A prototype solar concentrator for sweet sorghum juice was developed by students and Professors at St. Thomas University in St. Paul, Minnesota, in collaboration with the Mali sorghum team and with support from the USAID Linkage Grants. C2. Progress towards the achievement of research outcomes and IDOs Flagship Project 1 - Priority Setting & Adoption: A country report for barley in Morocco included baseline status of barley in the arid and semi-arid regions of Morocco, scope for barley production in Morocco both at the national level and in the arid zone, and analysis of agricultural policies in Morocco, specifically agricultural trading policies. The strength of this country information supported a Morocco national workshop on seed delivery, facilitated by Dryland Cereals, which in turn led to the re-evaluation of the Green Morocco Plan by the Moroccan Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, and the inclusion of an emphasis on barley to increase the production of certified seed from the current 1%, of all seed types produced, to 22% by 2020. Flagship Project 2 – Improved Varieties & Hybrids The year saw the releases of (1) the drought-tolerant, yellow-rust resistant, barley variety, BHS 400, for the northern hill states of India, and the cold- and drought-tolerant winter barley variety, Ansar, for the cold drylands of Iran, (2) three finger millet varieties in Ethiopia, (3) the early maturing, higher-yielding pearl millet variety, Jira-Ne (meaning “Hunger Breaker”) in Nigeria, and (4) the high-yielding, high-iron pearl millet hybrid ICMH 1201 as “Shakti 1201” in India, and a first-year commercial distribution of 10 tons of its seed. These releases are based on germplasm developed and distributed by the participating CGIAR Centers, ICARDA and ICRISAT, and released by partnering NARS or the private sector. Selection of the bio-fortified pearl millet hybrid, Shakti 1201, was directly supported by A4NH, while its hybrid parents were bred with direct support from Dryland Cereals. This hybrid combined an iron content of 72 ppm and a zinc content of 39 ppm with good agronomic performance and yield, against reported iron and zinc content ranges, respectively, of 30-146 and 25-85 ppm in pearl millet, 10-63 and 13-58 ppm in maize, 29-57 and 25-53 ppm in wheat, and 6-24 and 14-35 ppm in rice.

http://www.icrisat.org/newsroom/latest-news/happenings/happenings1668.htm#3


7 | P a g e

The two barley varieties identified and released by NARS from India and Iran based on germplasm provided by ICARDA, are in addition to two varieties released by NARS in China. In addition to adaptation to production environments, these new barley varieties have tolerance to the abiotic and biotic stresses affecting crop production in the respective countries. The variety BHS 400, targeted for rainfed cultivation in northern hills zone in India, is tolerant to drought and resistant to yellow rust, and comes a year after the release of VL Jau 118, a high yielding and yellow-rust resistant variety, targeting the same agro-ecological zone. Three finger millet varieties (Acc # 229469, 229371 and 215990) were released in Ethiopia, and another three (Okhale-1, I.E. 4115, and KACIMMI 42) were recommended for release in Kenya. Ten varieties were included in the National Performance Trials (NPT) by the National Variety Release Committee (NVRC) in Uganda. The pearl millet variety "Jira-ne" (a re-selected version of early-maturing pearl millet germplasm accession PE05984, which originated from Burkina Faso) was released for cultivation in the Sahelian and Sudanian Savanna zone of northern Nigeria in December 2013. Compared with the previously released SOSAT-C88, the new variety flowers and matures 1-2 weeks earlier, reducing its vulnerability to terminal drought stress as well as migrating grain-feeding birds. It also has more compact panicles, reducing its vulnerability to millet head miner, and is well-suited for intercropping with groundnut and/or cowpea and relay cropping with vegetables like pepper and tomato. About 10 tons seed of one high-yielding and high-iron hybrid ICMH 1201 was produced and commercialized by a seed company as “Shakti 1201”, and was cultivated in farmers’ fields in north- western states of India in 2014. ICMH 1201 had been tested at 28 sites both in peninsular and northern India for 2 years, and showed 72 ppm iron content and 39 ppm Zn. Release and upscaling of the hybrid was supported by A4NH, while the hybrid parents used in the production of this hybrid were bred with the support from Dryland Cereals.

The sorghum hybrids IESH 22002, IESH 22009 and IESH 22011 entered into NPT in Kenya in 2013 by the Kenya Seed Company were recommended for release. The Kenya Seed Company also entered the sweet sorghum varieties IS 21064, S 35, IESV 92001 DL, SPV 422 and ICSR 93034 into the NPT in 2013, and all were recommended for release targeting livestock feeding. These are now under Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) trials. ICRISAT provided support for breeder-seed provision upon requests from testing and release institutions, and also assisted in organizing trial data for release.

Flagship Project 3 – Integrated Crop Management: The most important diseases and pests of barley in Morocco and Ethiopia were identified based on three years’ (2012-14) survey data, and allowed the development of focused pest control measures. Seed treatment of barley with Celest ®Top and/or Apron Star 42WS reduced the spread of aphid-transmitted barley yellow dwarf virus-PAV (BYDV-PAV) and infestation by wheat stem saw fly, thus reducing yield losses caused by these pests. The effectiveness of seed treatment with Apron Star 42 WS for improving pearl millet plant stand was demonstrated on-farm in Niger, with treated plots showing 53% yield advantage (210 kg ha-1) over non-treated controls, as a result of 26% increase in the number of hills harvested. Grain yields of 1250 kg ha-1 could be recorded with seed treatment alone on local varieties, compared to 875 kg ha-1 with no treatment. For sorghum in India, the improved cultivars, crop production technologies, seed production, drought management, processing and marketing methods disseminated by ICRISAT and partners under the HOPE project were adopted by the Govt of Maharashtra, India, for increasing the post-rainy sorghum productivity under the National Food Security Mission.

Flagship Project 4 - Seed Systems & Input Services:

An integrated community-based barley seed production effort in the Wolmera district of Ethiopia produced 32.14 t of seed, and an estimated 8.1 t seed is to be produced from farmers’ fields in Morocco through the intervention of INRA. The national target for Niger for 2015 is the use of

http://drylandcereals.cgiar.org/new-barley-variety-released-in-india-demonstrates-resistance-to-yellow-rust/


8 | P a g e

improved seed on 30% of national cropped area, and the pearl millet breeding group and seed unit at ICRISAT-Sadore worked together with partners, including local seed companies, to supply 734 tons of certified seed of five pearl millet varieties. This constituted 10% of the 7350 tons of total pearl millet certified seed available for sale and sowing during the 2014 rainy season in Niger, and translates to roughly 180,000 ha at a seed rate of 4kg ha-1. The Seed Consortium formed in 2013 for the dissemination of improved post-rainy sorghum seed in India put more than 2000 ha under seed production in 2014, targeting coverage of 400,000 ha with improved seed in 2015.

Flagship 5 – Postharvest Value & Output Markets: The intervention of ICRISAT’s Agribusiness & Innovation Platform led to the initial marketing of two sorghum- and millet-based food products, Sorghum Crispies and Smart Brkfast, in India. Sorghum Crispies was commercialized in Hyderabad in December 2014 by Ind Millet Foods in two flavours, tomato and masala, marketed under the brand name of ‘Rigdam’. The ICRISAT-developed Smart Brkfast is a single-serve, ready-to-eat, breakfast-cereal concept, the main ingredients of which are roasted flakes made from sorghum and pearl millet. The all natural, gluten- and sugar-free product, which is also a source of pre-biotics, was commercialized through M/s Mathesis Engineering Pvt. Ltd. under the brand name of “Navya Smart BrkFast”, available in the market from December 2014.

C3. Progress towards impact An economic assessment of sorghum improvement in Mali during the HOPE project years of 2009 to 2013 identified that improved varieties and newly released hybrids represented 32% of all sorghum area by 2013. In India, improved post-rainy sorghum varieties and technologies were disseminated to about 300,000 farmers in Maharashtra during this same period under the HOPE project, leading to an increase in grain yield by 35-40% and stover yield by 20% in participating farmers’ fields. Early adoption studies in India indicated that HOPE interventions enhanced technology adoption rates, reduced yield gaps (by 30%), increased productivity and gave higher returns to farmers (35-44%). ‘Dhanashakthi’, the bio-fortified pearl millet variety released in India in 2013, based on breeding material developed by Dryland Cereals, was up-scaled by A4NH, and planted on 30,000 ha in Maharashtra, India, in 2014, with the seed company, Nirmal Seeds Pvt. Ltd., selling more than 300 tons of its seed. Training of farmers, 70% of them women, on finger millet production, postharvest handling and value addition resulted in increased grain productivity from an average of 4 bags (90 kg each) to 8 bags per acre. Grain quality also improved with buyers and processors reporting less dirt, sand and stones in the traded grain, which in turn has led to increased gate prices for finger millet.

D. GENDER RESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTS A Senior Scientist for Gender Research was appointed, and started in March, 2014. This enabled Dryland Cereals to participate in ‘GENNOVATE: Enabling gender equality in agricultural and environmental innovation’, leading to the collection of gender-disaggregated quantitative and qualitative data pertinent to changing gender norms and agency in dryland-cereals’ production. Participation of Dryland Cereals in GENNOVATE filled a major gap in the project, namely, the absence of case studies from Francophone West Africa. This ongoing effort is expected to inform R&D efforts across the dryland cereals value chain by identifying and understanding gender constraints in production and processing, and by providing qualitative support for analyzing quantitative baseline data collected under the HOPE project. It will also provide information on gender disparities in dryland cereals systems, and identify critical entry points for practical interventions for gender equity. The Dryland Cereals’ gender-team capacity was further expanded in late 2014 with the hire of a Scientific Officer for Gender Research, based in Bamako, Mali, starting in January 2015. The Scientific Officer will focus on charting integration of gender in Dryland Cereals research for development and assessing gender equality in planning and implementation of project activities.

http://1drv.ms/1bgE6C7




9 | P a g e

Dryland Cereals participated in the CG-level, multi-CRP, social-science global study that targets agricultural innovation, agency and gender norms in CGIAR-targeted communities. Five cases studies were completed in Mali in 2014 and additional case studies are being done in Burkina Faso, India, and Niger during 2015. An application for a Post-Doctoral Fellow, submitted to the CGIAR Gender Network, was successful, with intended recruitment in 2015. This fellowship is a multi-CRP collaboration focusing on gender and breeding in Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes and A4NH, and will determine gender preferences for crop traits through the collection and analysis of community-level gender-disaggregated data on production, processing and marketing of dryland cereals and grain legumes. Results of this work will contribute to the integration of gender dimensions into research and development for normalizing and strengthening the participation of women in technology development, testing and dissemination.

Market surveys on food barley products and processing in Morocco and Ethiopia identified the need for focused future inclusion of women for interventions on value addition and market access to balance work opportunities and income generation. Two associations of rural women were identified for pilot activities on hydroponic barley and its potential future expansion to the production of homemade barley bread in Morocco and Besso in Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, a community-based seed production effort at two locations in the Wolmera district trained a total of 253 and 279 women farmers’ research and extension groups (WFREG) at Robe Gebeya and Telecho Kebeles, respectively, in seed production and management. Hands-on training on seed and crop production, and post-harvest handling of finger millet was provided to 423 members of 15 new women groups. The introduction of mechanical innovations like ferti-cum seed drill, weeders and threshers together with crop improvement and crop management technologies for pearl millet in the HOPE cluster villages of Rajasthan, Haryana, and Gujarat in Western India continue to provide time savings and reduced drudgery for women, enabling the redirection of time to other activities that generated additional farm income. Training on business opportunities in sorghum and pearl millet value chain is being imparted to the Association of Lady Entrepreneurs of Andhra Pradesh, by ICRISAT’s Agri-Business and Innovation Platform, and two groups of women entrepreneurs (Ind-Millet and Mathesis) started their business in these value-chains. About 200 women farmers were trained in India on the use of blanching as a technique to increase shelf-life of pearl millet flour. Consumption of whole-grain sorghum and millets by women and children below five years of age increased in targeted communities in Mali as a consequence of a project that encouraged the use of whole grains. Whole-grain consumption of sorghum and millets improves the intake of iron and zinc.

Dryland Cereals moved closer to meeting requirements in 2014, relative to 2013, with the hiring of scientific personnel to address gender research, collection of gender-disaggregated data, and the continuing integration of gender research into project activities. Since the crops addressed by the program are considered to be women’s crops in Africa, almost all research and development efforts of the program contribute to fulfilling agricultural needs of women farmers.

E. PARTNERSHIP BUILDING ACHIEVEMENTS Historic partnerships of the participating CG centres with National Agricultural Research and Extension Services (NARES), farmer cooperatives and farmers continue to contribute to the selection and dissemination of improved varieties and crop-management practices for dryland-cereal crops in the target countries. Even as these partnerships are further strengthened, newer strategic partnerships are being explored and established with either Advanced Research Institutes (ARIs) for the development and/or utilization of advanced technology, or with processing industries and other strategic partners at the downstream end of the value chain. Implementation of program activities along the product delivery pipeline has facilitated the identification of gaps in required strategic partnerships and directed efforts towards filling these gaps, either with other CGIAR Research Programs or with external partners.


10 | P a g e

The newly established partnership of ICARDA with Anheuser-Busch InBev has resulted in the introduction of new barley genotypes with known malting quality into ICARDA germplasm, while a nested association mapping population of 3000 lines from a cross of 25 exotic barley lines with the German cultivar, Barke, was donated to ICARDA by the University of Halle-Wittenberg, Germany. The second phase of the contract research project of ICARDA with IASA in Mexico is contributing to the development of malt barley varieties with adaptation value to East Africa and South Asia. New linkages are being formalized for the development of hydroponic barley, for forage, with the International Livestock Research Institute, for implementation within the project initiative, LIVES (Livestock and Irrigation Value chains for Ethiopian Smallholders), funded by the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD) of Canada to promote market-led agricultural development. A partnership is also being developed with Behaylu Abraha who owns YB Plant Micro Propagation PLC, a small family business engaged in hydroponic technologies for barley in the Mekelle, Tigray region of Ethiopia.

New partnerships have been developed with processors such as Unga Millers (U) Ltd., and Family Diet, and models are being explored to achieve supply-demand equilibrium for finger millet products, as large-scale processing and marketing of millet products are currently limited by the supply of quality grain. The International Pearl Millet Genome Sequencing Consortium (IPMGSC), an informal consortium established through the facilitation of ICRISAT, has completed sequencing of the pearl millet genome, and analysis is in progress. Sequencing of the downy mildew pathogen of pearl millet, Sclerospora graminicola, was undertaken in collaboration with the University of California – Davis, while a partnership was formalized with INRA, Montpellier, to address drought tolerance in pearl millet, and collaboration was developed with the University of Queensland to upgrade the APSIM model for pearl millet. Further, flowering-time heat tolerance in pearl millet is being explored in collaboration with the Kansas State University, and collaboration has been developed with Abellon Energy, Gujarat, India, and the NARS in Madhya Pradesh to explore the potential of high biomass pearl millet for biofuel. The Sorghum Value Chain Development Consortium for Kenya was inaugurated in March 2014 in a collaborative effort between UniBrain-FARA and ICRISAT.

A Seed Consortium formed in India in 2013 for sustainable seed delivery of post-rainy sorghum include multiple partners (Dept of Agriculture, Govt of Maharashtra; Maharashtra State Seeds Corporation; National Seed Corporation; State Seed Certification Agency; Directorate of Sorghum Research; Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth; Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth; and private seed companies), and targeted seed production on 2000 ha across two regions in 2014. Collaboration initiated in 2014 with the Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture focuses on demonstration trials in West and Central Africa of ICRISAT-based varieties of sorghum and pearl millet, together with others, towards the goal of facilitating release of farmer-selected varieties in target countries in the region. The Hybrid Parent Research Consortium model, established in India in 2000 by ICRISAT together with public and private partners leading to the increased dissemination and increased productivity of hybrid sorghum and pearl millet in India, is being extended to East and Southern Africa for sorghum.

Collaborative research with other CGIAR Research Programs include Dryland Cereals-supported research on (1) fodder quality of sorghum and millets implemented by Livestock & Fish, (2) identification of high-yielding pearl millet varieties for further selection of bio-fortified material by A4NH, (3) demand and constraint analyses, and value-chain analyses with indirect links to PIM, and (4) integrated crop and livestock management, with indirect links to Dryland Systems. The indirect links with PIM and Dryland Systems exist through the leadership of Flagship 1 (Priority Setting and Adoption) and Flagship 3 (Integrated Crop Management) of Dryland Cereals, respectively, by ICRISAT’s programs on Markets, Institutions and Policies, and Resilient Dryland Systems which in turn have integral connections with the relevant CGIAR Research Programs.

http://ethiolivestock-invest.com/yb-plant-micro-propagation-plc/

http://ethiolivestock-invest.com/yb-plant-micro-propagation-plc/

http://www.new-ag.info/06-4/develop/dev01.html

http://www.new-ag.info/06-4/develop/dev01.html

http://www.ceg.icrisat.org/ipgsc.html

http://www.sorghum3fs.co.ke/

http://www.sorghum3fs.co.ke/


11 | P a g e

Finally, a Commissioned Grants program was implemented in 2014 for a total amount of $649k, devoted to critical research areas where partner strength and expertise supported the CRP impact pathway.

F. CAPACITY BUILDING Dryland Cereals follows the CGIAR Open Access Policy as indicated in the Intellectual Assets Report for the program for 2014. A total of 1494 participants, including 142 women, were trained in short-duration capacity development courses specifically targeting millets and sorghum. In addition, a total of 209 participants, including 57 women, were trained in generic courses related to millets and sorghum. Topics addressed in these training courses included hybrid seed production and parental line maintenance; large-scale trait phenotyping; farmer field schools on integrated Striga and soil-fertility management; agricultural production techniques for resilience to climate change; and certified seed production. Farmer field days, with focus on finger millet, were attended by 1140 farmers (70% women) who took part in demonstrations and participatory selection of improved varieties, micro-dosing, Striga management, postharvest handling and value addition. Ten scientists (8 men and 2 women) working on finger millet were trained in Integrated Breeding Management Systems. A total of 58 learner participants including 26 women, were in training during 2014 as interns, fellows or scholars for Master’s and Ph.D. programs in research areas pertinent to sorghum and millets. A policy outreach workshop on promotion of pearl millet technologies focused on improving productivity, profitability and livelihoods of the poor in the semi-arid tropics of India was held on 24th February, 2014 in Bikaner, Rajasthan.

At ICARDA, a training program on genotyping and association mapping for multiple traits in barley, organized by the barley team, was attended by 17 participants from ten countries, and the participants also selected 2562 advanced breeding lines from ICARDA germplasm for evaluation in target ecologies in their respective countries. Two short-term courses were organized on barley seed science and technology: (i) variety identification and quality seed production; and (ii) seed marketing and enterprise management. In addition, as already reported under gender research achievements, a total of 253 women farmers’ research and extension groups at Robe Gebeya and 279 in Telecho Kebeles were trained in barley seed production and management by NARS and members of farmer groups.

G. RISK MANAGEMENT

(1) Sub-optimal staffing of the participating CG centres in the target countries, mostly as a consequence of mismatch between program funding and scope, is a serious risk that can prolong the time to impact or dilute the intensity of potential impact. Adequate program budgets combined with appropriate measures by Centres for optimal staffing and succession planning are critical especially as the program prepares for the second phase. An interim solution is the utilization of part of the W1-W2 funds for commissioned and competitive grants thus facilitating quality research to address immediate needs. (2) A second challenge is the significant transaction cost involved in maintaining the W1-W2 budget, while also investigating and applying for bilateral funding opportunities to enable conduct of critical research necessary to deliver on program goals. (3) Finally, as indicated in previous reports, the social and political instability in the regions of operation of the program makes it important to identify and utilize comparable agro-ecologies for unimpeded continuity of crop improvement research. Already established shuttle breeding locations offer the most immediate possibility for such continuity, beyond the immediate concept of shuttle breeding itself.

H. LESSONS LEARNED Overall level of confidence/uncertainty of the indicators provided in Table 1: In general, the confidence level this year is fairly good on almost all indicators. Uniformity in reporting can improve further across Flagships and Clusters of Activities with better understanding

http://1drv.ms/1bgDw7g

http://1drv.ms/1DLNkOv


12 | P a g e

of the different indicators. It is likely that the full capture of all efforts in the program has not occurred in the report. This is primarily due of the absence, as yet, of a software system in the CRP for planning and reporting. The CRP office is in the process of discussion to develop a planning and reporting tool in collaboration with Dryland Systems by mid-year, such that reporting for 2015 and planning for 2016 are able to utilize this tool.

Indicators 33 and 34 remain approximations based on calculations of seed sold, seed-rate used, and smallholder farm size. This is likely to continue to be the case in future reporting as well, but such calculation does represent the best approximation possible. GIS technology together with sample household surveys could further improve confidence over such approximation, though not by much.

Description, if relevant, of research avenues that did not produce expected results, and description of actions taken by the CRP, such as new research directions pursued and their expected outputs and outcomes: Analysis of existing policies, preparation and publication of policy briefs, and active policy interventions are areas that can be improved further. Integration of an active socio-economic component in the program through the formalization of Flagship 1, Priority Setting and Adoption, is expected to help address the above to the extent possible, within the constraints of the recent budget adjustment for 2015.

Lessons learned by the CRP from its monitoring of the indicators and from its qualitative analyses of progress: Significant achievements remain unpublished, thus reducing visibility to the research and

development accomplishments of participating Centers and partner institutions. This is planned to be addressed through the Dryland Cereals Communications as we move forward.

Scientists within the program, primarily breeders, have been in the mode of addressing research in a holistic perspective, even prior to the start of the program. This has contributed to the richness of research reports from the program, especially for the 2014 reporting year, when cohesive streamlining of program planning, implementation and reporting improved further.

Increased attention to implementation focus and distributed responsibilities for practical implementation among partners can help manage workloads better and accelerate the path to impact.


13 | P a g e

Annex 1: CRP indicators of progress, with glossary and targets.

Details of information for Annex 1 can be accessed here. List of published blog stories and press releases can be accessed here.

CRPs concerned by this indicator

Indicator Glossary/guidelines for defining and measuring the indicator, and description of what the CRP includes in the indicator measured, based upon the glossary

Deviation narrative (if actual is more than 10% away from target)

2013 2014 2015

Target Actual Target Actual Target

KNOWLEDGE, TOOLS, DATA

All 1. Number of flagship “products” produced by CRP. Note: These are significant concepts, though not all are published. We need to pay more attention to publishing such critical concepts for increased visibility.

Glossary: These are frameworks and concepts that are significant and complete enough to have been highlighted on web pages, publicized through blog stories, press releases and/or policy briefs. They are significant in that they should be likely to change the way stakeholders along the impact pathway allocate resources and/or implement activities. They should be products that change the way these stakeholders think and act. Tools, decision-support tools, guidelines and/or training manuals are not included in this indicator. Specify what type of products, from above glossary, you have included in the number indicated under 2013; if relevant specify geographic locations.

2 3 3 9 3

All 2. % of flagship products produced that have explicit target of women farmers/NRM managers. Note: The dryland cereals crops being considered primarily as women's crops, percentage flagships with target on women farmers will be more than 50%, but is accepted here as 50%.

Glossary: The web pages, blog stories, press releases and policy briefs supporting indicator #1 must have an explicit focus on women farmers/NRM managers to be counted. Provide concrete examples of what you include in this indicator.

50 67 50 50 50

http://1drv.ms/1zs31OG

http://1drv.ms/1EsevR9


14 | P a g e

All 3. % of flagship products produced that have been assessed for likely gender- disaggregated impact. Note: Gender research staffing has only started in 2014, and it is expected that there will be better address of required analysis in the coming year.

Glossary; Reports/papers describing the products should include a focus on gender-disaggregated impacts if they are to be counted Provide concrete examples of what you include in this indicator

50 67 50 11 25

All 4. Number of ”tools” produced by CRP

Glossary: These are significant decision-support tools, guidelines, and/or training manuals that are significant and complete enough to have been highlighted on web pages, publicized through blog stories, press releases and/or policy briefs. They are significant in that they should be likely to change the way stakeholders along the impact pathway allocate resources and/or implement activities. Based on the glossary, describe the types of outputs you include in this indicator.

5 9 5 8 5

All 5. % of tools that have an explicit target of women farmers. Note: As indicated under point 2 above.

Glossary: The web pages, blog stories, press releases and policy briefs supporting indicator #4 must have an explicit focus on women farmers/NRM managers to be counted

50 100 50 75 50

All 6. % of tools assessed for likely gender-disaggregated impact. Note: As indicated under point 2 above.

Glossary: Reports/papers describing the products should include a focus on gender-disaggregated impacts if they are to be counted

50 25 50 0 0

All 7. Number of open access databases maintained by CRP. Note: 3 existing ones are included in the total number, in addition to 2014 reported numbers. Intellectual assets report attached here.

Indicate the type of data bases (e.g., socio-economic survey data; crop yields in field experiments…) you are reporting on in the following columns

3 4 3 5 3

All 8. Total number of users of these open access databases. Note: Using baseline numbers from 2013.

200 514 300 >300 300



15 | P a g e

All 9. Number of publications in ISI journals produced by CRP. Note: Intellectual assets report attached here.

45 52 45 47 45

1,2,3, 4, 6 10. Number of strategic value chains analyzed by CRP

Clearly indicate the type of value chains you are reporting on in the next columns

2 3 4 5 3

1,5,6,7 11. Number of targeted agro-ecosystems analysed/characterised by CRP

Specify the type of system, using its main products as descriptors (e.g., mixed crop, livestock system; monoculture of XX; agroforestry with maize, beans, etc..; mixed cropping with upland rice, cassava, etc...)by geographical location and agroecological zones (FAO typology)

1,5,6,7 12. Estimated population of above-mentioned agro- ecosystems

CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT AND INNOVATION PLATFORMS

All 13. Number of trainees in short-term programs facilitated by CRP (male). Note: Farmers field school training is included.

Glossary: The number of individuals to whom significant knowledge or skills have been imparted through interactions that are intentional, structured, and purposed for imparting knowledge or skills should be counted. This includes farmers, ranchers, fishers, and other primary sector producers who receive training in a variety of best practices in productivity, post-harvest management, linking to

markets, etc. It also includes rural entrepreneurs, processors, managers and traders receiving training in application of new technologies, business management, linking to markets, etc., and training to extension specialists, researchers, policymakers and others who are engaged in the food, feed and fiber system and natural resources and water management. Include training on climate risk analysis, adaptation, mitigation, and vulnerability assessments, as it relates to agriculture. Training should include food security, water resources management/IWRM, sustainable agriculture, and climate change resilience. Indicate, from the above list, the general subject matters in which training was provided

1000 1218 1000 6596 1000



16 | P a g e

All 14. Number of trainees in short-term programs facilitated by CRP (female)

(see above, but for female) 500 616 750 3503 750

All 15. Number of trainees in long-term programs facilitated by CRP (male)

Glossary: The number of people who are currently enrolled in or graduated in the current fiscal year from a bachelor’s, master’s or Ph.D. program or are currently participating in or have completed in the current fiscal year a long term (degree-seeking) advanced training program such as a fellowship program or a post-doctoral studies program. A person completing one long term training program in the fiscal year and currently participating in another long term training program should be counted only once. Specify in this cell number of Master’s and number of PhD’s

20 45 20 22 20

All 16.Number of trainees in long-term programs facilitated by CRP (female)

(see above, but for female) 20 8 15 7 10

1,5,6,7 17. Number of multi- stakeholder R4D innovation platforms established for the targeted agro-ecosystems by the CRPs

Glossary: To be counted, a multi-stakeholder platform has to have a clear purpose, generally to manage some type of tradeoff/conflict among the different interests of different stakeholders in the targeted agro-ecosystems, and inclusive and clear governance mechanisms, leading to decisions to manage the variety of perspectives of stakeholders in a manner satisfactory to the whole platform. Indicate the focus of each platform in this cell, including geographical focus.

TECHNOLOGIES/PRACTICES IN VARIOUS STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT


17 | P a g e

All 18. Number of technologies/NRM practices under research in the CRP (Phase I)

Glossary: Technologies to be counted here are agriculture-related and NRM-related technologies and innovations including those that address climate change adaptation and mitigation. Relevant technologies include but are not limited to: • Mechanical and physical: New land preparation, harvesting, processing and product handling technologies, including biodegradable packaging; • Biological: New germplasm (varieties, breeds, etc.) that could be higher-yielding or higher in nutritional content and/or more resilient to climate impacts; affordable food-based nutritional supplementation such as vitamin A-rich sweet potatoes or rice, or high-protein maize, or improved livestock breeds; soil management practices that increase biotic activity and soil organic matter levels; and livestock health services and products such as vaccines; • Chemical: Fertilizers, insecticides, and pesticides sustainably and environmentally applied, and soil amendments that increase fertilizer-use efficiencies; • Management and cultural practices: sustainable water management; practices; sustainable land management practices; sustainable fishing practices; Information technology, improved/sustainable agricultural production and marketing practices, increased use of climate information for planning disaster risk strategies in place, climate change mitigation and energy efficiency, and natural resource management practices that increase productivity and/or resiliency to climate change. IPM, ISFM, and PHH as related to agriculture should all be included as improved technologies or management practices; New technologies or management practices under research counted should be only those under research in the current reporting year. Any new technology or management practice under research in a previous year but not under research in the reporting year should not be included; Clearly indicate, from the list above, the type of technology and geographical location that you are reporting on in next columns

750 >750 750 6329 2500


18 | P a g e

All 19. % of technologies under research that have an explicit target of women farmers

The papers, web pages, blog stories, press releases and policy briefs supporting indicator #x must have an explicit focus on women farmers/NRM managers to be counted

50 50 50 50 50

All 20. % of technologies under research that have been assessed for likely gender- disaggregated impact

Reports/papers describing the products should include a focus on gender-disaggregated impacts if they are to be counted

50 50 50 10 10

1,5,6,7 21 Number of agro- ecosystems for which CRP has identified feasible approaches for improving ecosystem services and for establishing positive incentives for farmers to improve ecosystem functions as per the CRP’s recommendations

Use the same classification of agro-ecosystem as for indicator 11 above, including geographical location and agro-ecological zone

1,5,6,7 22. Number of people who will potentially benefit from plans, once finalised, for the scaling up of strategies

Indicate the potential number of both women and men

All, except 2 23. Number of technologies/NRM practices field tested (phase II). Note: Not all numbers are detailed in the Annex 1 excel sheet attached at the top of this table.

Glossary; Under “field testing” means that research has moved from focused development to broader testing (pilot project phase) and this testing is underway under conditions intended to duplicate those encountered by potential users of the new technology. This might be in the actual facilities (fields) of potential users, or it might be in a facility set up to duplicate those conditions. Clearly identify in this cell the type of technology and the geographical locations of the field testing/pilot projects reported in next columns

700 >700 700 2173 700

1,5,6,7 24. Number of agro- ecosystems for which innovations (technologies, policies, practices, integrative approaches) and options for improvement at system level have been developed and are being field tested (Phase II)

Clearly identify in this cell the type of technology and the geographical location of the field testing/pilot projects, and use the same classification of agroecosystem as for indicator 11, specifying the type of agroecosystems in which field testing is taking place


19 | P a g e

1,5,6,7 25. % of above innovations/approaches/options that are targeted at decreasing inequality between men and women

1,5,6,7 26. Number of published research outputs from CRP utilised in targeted agro- ecosystems

All, except 2 27.Number of technologies/NRM practices released by public and private sector partners globally (phase III)

Glossary: In the case of crop research that developed a new variety, e.g., the variety must have passed through any required approval process, and seed of the new variety should be available for multiplication. The technology should have proven benefits and be as ready for use as it can be as it emerges from the research and testing process. Technologies made available for transfer should be only those made available in the current reporting year. Any technology made available in a previous year should not be included. Clearly identify in this cell the technologies/practices thus released (scale up phase), the geographical areas concerned

15 >15 15 8 10

POLICIES IN VARIOUS STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT

All 28. Numbers of Policies/ Regulations/ Administrative Procedures Analyzed (Stage 1)

Number of agricultural enabling environment policies / regulations/ administrative procedures in the areas of agricultural resource, food, market standards & regulation, public investment, natural resource or water management and climate change adaptation/mitigation as it relates to agriculture that underwent the first stage of the policy reform process i.e. analysis (review of existing policy / regulation / administrative procedure and/or proposal of new policy / regulations / administrative procedures).Please count the highest stage completed during the reporting year – don't double count for the same policy. Clearly identify in this cell the type of policy, regulations, etc. from the above list

3 3 4 4 3


20 | P a g e

All 29. Number of policies / regulations / administrative procedures drafted and presented for public/stakeholder consultation (Stage 2). Note: This refers to the intervention of INRAN, Morocco, in collaborationw with Dryland Cereals, with regard to the Morocco Green Plan.

….. ……that underwent the second stage of the policy reform process. The second stage includes public debate and/or consultation with stakeholders on the proposed new or revised policy / regulation / administrative procedure. Clearly identify in this cell the type of policy, regulations and so on, and the geographical location of the consultations

0 0 1 1 0

All 30. Number of policies / regulations / administrative procedures presented for legislation (Stage 3). Note: Same as under point 29 above.

: … underwent the third stage of the policy reform process (policies were presented for legislation/decree to improve the policy environment for smallholder-based agriculture.) Clearly identify in this cell the type of policy and the country/region concerned

0 0 1 1 0

All 31. Number of policies / regulations / administrative procedures prepared passed/approved (Stage 4). Note: Same as under point 29 above.

: …underwent the fourth stage of the policy reform process (official approval (legislation/decree) of new or revised policy / regulation / administrative procedure by relevant authority). Clearly identify in this cell the type of policy and the country/region concerned

0 0 1 1 0

All 32. Number of policies / regulations / administrative procedures passed for which implementation has begun (Stage 5). Note: Same as under point 29 above.

: …completed the policy reform process (implementation of new or revised policy / regulation / administrative procedure by relevant authority). Clearly identify in this cell the type of policy and the country/region concerned

0 0 1 1 1

OUTCOMES ON THE GROUND


21 | P a g e

All 33. Number of hectares under improved technologies or management practices as a result of CRP research. Note: A full capture of data is not yet there for 33 and 34 for all the Clusters of Activities. Information is a combination of pre-existing acreage and farmers, plus new. There are likely underestimations in some cases but not overestimations.

Clearly identify in this cell the geographic locations where this is occurring and whether the application of technologies is on a new or continuing area

20,000 in WCA 15,000 in ESA 15,000 in WA

and NA 30,000 in SA

20,000 in WCA 15,000 in ESA 15,000 in WA

and NA 30,000 in SA

20,000 in WCA 15,000 in ESA 15,000 in WA

and NA 30,000 in SA

30,800 in

WCA;

30,000 in

ESA;

15,000 in

WA and

NA;

222,000

in SA

20,000

in WCA

15,000

in ESA

15,000

in WA

and NA

30,000

in SA

All 34. Number of farmers and others who have applied new technologies or management practices as a result of CRP research

Clearly identify in this cell the geographic location of these farmers and whether the application of technologies is on a new or continuing area and indicate: 34 (a) number of women farmers concerned 34(b) number of male farmers concerned

10,000 in WCA 5000 in

ESA 30,000 in WA

and NA 25,000 in SA

10,000 in WCA 5000 in

ESA 30,000 in WA

and NA 25,000 in SA

10,000 in WCA 5000 in

ESA 30,000 in WA

and NA 25,000 in SA

31,000 in

WCA;

30,000 in

ESA; 5000

in WA

and NA;

311,000

in SA

10,000

in WCA

5000 in

ESA

30,000

in WA

and NA

25,000

in SA


22 | P a g e

Annex 2: Performance indicators for gender mainstreaming with targets defined

Performance Indicator CRP performance approaches requirements

CRP performance meets requirements CRP performance exceeds requirements

1. Gender inequality targets defined

Sex-disaggregated social data is being collected and used to diagnose important gender-related constraints in at least one of the CRP’s main target populations

Sex-disaggregated social data collected and used to diagnose important gender-related constraints in at least one of the CRP’s main target populations

And

The CRP has defined and collected baseline data on the main dimensions of gender inequality in the CRP’s main target populations relevant to its expected outcomes ( IDOs)

Sex-disaggregated social data collected and used to diagnose important gender-related constraints in at least one of the CRP’s main target populations

And

The CRP has defined and collected baseline data on the main dimensions of gender inequality in the CRP’s main target populations relevant to its expected outcomes (IDOs)

And

CRP targets changes in levels of gender inequality to which the CRP is or plans to contribute, with related numbers of men and women beneficiaries in main target populations

2. Institutional architecture for integration of gender is in place

- CRP scientists and managers with responsibility for gender in the CRP’s outputs are appointed, have written TORS.

- Procedures defined to report use of available diagnostic or baseline knowledge on gender routinely for assessment of the gender equality implications of the CRP’s flagship research products as per the Gender Strategy

-CRP M&E system has protocol for tracking progress on integration of gender in research

- CRP scientists and managers with responsibility for gender in the CRP’s outputs are appointed, have written TORS and funds allocated to support their interaction.



And

A CRP plan approved for capacity development in gender analysis

CRP scientists and managers with responsibility for gender in the CRP’s outputs are appointed, have written TORS and funds allocated to support their interaction.



And

A CRP plan approved for capacity development in gender analysis

And

The CRP uses feedback provided by its M&E system to improve its integration of gender into research


23 | P a g e

Ref Description Comments

Budget and Financial Reports

L101 CRP Cumulative Financial Summary

L106 CRP Annual Funding Summary

L111 CRP Annual Financial Summary

L121 CRP - Expenditure by Natural Classification Report

L131 CRP - Flagship Projects Report

L136 Gender Expenditure by Theme

L141 CRP - Cluster of Activities Report

Analytical Financial Reports

L211 CRP Partnerships Report

Notes

Most reports are for current year only. Exceptions are L101 which is multi-year (cumulative).

All reports shown here are for individual CRP's. The Consortium Office will prepare consolidated CRP reports.

Budget figures in all of the attached forms should be the annual confirmed budget (POWB) for the year.

W1/2 total will be as the Financing Plan notified by the Consortium Office, and W3/Bilateral the forecast prepared internally.

Actual events since the signing of the PIAs result in the budget per PIA no longer being a meaningful measure of performance.

For reporting purposes, please delete from L121 and L131 Centers not relevant to your CRP

INDEXCRP Financial Reporting Templates

Included mainly for reconciliation purposes and to eliminate double

counting of CGIAR collaboration costs; note that it is the net amount (i.e.

expenses excluding CGIAR collaboration costs) which should be used as the

total for L111 and L131

Simplified - Source of funding no longer required; note that this report is

still titled "Themes"; transition is underway and some CRPs are already

recording costs by Flagship Project. If that is the case for your CRP, please

change the title of the report.

Total spending for the year by Center, including Gender expenditure

Report : L101

CRP No. 3.6- "Dryland Cereals"

Period 01 July 2012 - 31 December 2014

Amounts in USD (000's)

Report Description

Name of Report: Cumuative Financial Summary

Frequency/Period: Annual

Deadline: Every April 15th

(b) Actual Expenses - Cumulative (c) Variance - Cumulative

CentersWindows 1

& 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds

Total

Funding

Windows 1

& 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds

Total

Funding

Windows 1

& 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds

Total

Funding

ICARDA * 5,594 102 3,672 - 9,368 5,091 89 1,647 - 6,828 503 13 2,025 - 2,540 ICRISAT ** 14,968 9,217 23,557 - 47,742 14,540 6,933 16,675 - 38,148 428 2,284 6,882 - 9,594 GCP - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 20,562 9,319 27,229 - 57,110 19,631 7,022 18,322 - 44,976 931 2,297 8,907 - 12,134

Percentage 36% 16% 48% 0% 100% 44% 16% 41% - 100% 8% 19% 73% 0% 100%

(a) Total POWB budget since inception

Cumulative Financial Summary

D:\2014 audit-kvm\CRP's\CRP3.6\Dryland Cereals-Lead Center Financial Reporting for 2014,Report L101

Report : L106


Period 01 January 2014 - 31 December 2014


Name of Report: Annual Funding Summary



PART 1 - Annual FINANCE PLAN (Totals for Windows 1 and 2 combined)Approved Level for Year - Initial Approval (as per PIA) -

Approved Level for Year - Final Amount -

Name of the Donor Window

1&2 Window 3

Bilateral

funding

Total

Funding

Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research 8,526 - - 8,526

Aga Khan Foundation - - 2 2

Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development (AFESD) - - 43 43

Australia - - 131 131

Austrian Development Agency (ADA) - - 107 107

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation - 1,428 2,866 4,294

Centre de Cooperation Internationale en Recherche Agronomiquie pour le Development - - 86 86

CIMMYT: Generation Challenge Program - - 207 207

Common Fund for Commodities - - 79 79

Conseil Ouest et Centre Africain pour la Recherche et le Development Agricoles - - 9 9

Cornell University, USA - - 14 14

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, Germany - - 500 500

Egypt - Agricultural Research Center (ARC) - - 22 22

European Commission - - 68 68

European Union - 707 - 707

Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa - - 193 193

Grains Research & Development Corporation (GRDC) - - 42 42

Impulsora Agricola, S.A. de C.V. (IASA) - - 421 421

India - 560 896 1,456

International Center for Biosaline Agriculture - - 11 11

International Livestock Research Institute - - 17 17

Kansas State University - - 22 22

Mali - 906 12 918

McKnight Foundation - - 285 285

Michigan State University - - 23 23

Netherlands - - 79 79

Nigeria - - 213 213

Pioneer Overseas Corporation - - 13 13

Rothamsted Research Ltd., UK - - 167 167

SFF/ICRISAT Endowment - - 37 37

The Bureau of Agricultural Research, Philippines - - 27 27

The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) - - 2 2

The University of Georgia Research Foundation Inc. - - 175 175

The West Africa Agricultural Productivity Programme (WAAPP) - Nigeria - - 6 6

Uniliver Industries Pvt. Ltd., - - 24 24

United States Agency for International Development - 1,988 61 2,049

University of California, USA - - 295 295

University of Georgia - Generation Challenge Program - - 26 26

Totals for CRP 8,526 5,589 7,180 21,295

Annual Funding Summary

2014 Actual Funding


Report : L111



Report Description

Name of Report: Annual Financial Summary by Centers & Other Participants


Period: 01 January 2014 - 31 December 2014


CentersWindows 1

& 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds

Total

Funding

Windows 1

& 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds

Total

Funding

Windows 1

& 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds

Total

Funding

ICARDA* 2,463 53 1,052 - 3,568 1,960 46 720 - 2,727 503 7 332 - 841 ICRISAT** 6,994 6,246 8,848 - 22,088 6,566 5,543 6,460 - 18,569 428 703 2,388 - 3,519 GCP - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 9,457 6,299 9,900 - 25,656 8,526 5,589 7,180 - 21,296 931 710 2,720 - 4,360

Percentage 37% 25% 39% 0% 100% 40% 26% 34% 0% 100% 21% 16% 62% 0% 100%

(a) CRP 2014 POWB approved budget (b) CRP 2014 Expenditure (c) Variance this Year

Annual Financial Summary by Centers


Report L121


Amounts in USD 000's

Report Description

Name of Report: Financial Summary by Natural Classification lines




Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Personnel 2,673 973 2,414 - 6,060 2,675 591 1,837 - 5,104 (2) 382 577 - 957

Collaborator Costs - CGIAR Centers 87 700 - - 787 87 25 - - 112 (0) 675 - - 675

Collaborator Costs - Partners 1,372 2,011 1,966 - 5,349 1,003 2,741 1,462 - 5,206 369 (730) 504 - 143

Supplies and Services 2,687 2,198 3,526 - 8,410 2,687 1,543 2,144 - 6,374 (0) 655 1,382 - 2,036

Operational Travel 663 9 725 - 1,398 663 156 742 - 1,561 1 (147) (17) - (163)

Depreciation 761 74 93 - 928 282 115 52 - 449 479 (41) 41 - 479

Sub-total of Direct Costs 8,243 5,965 8,724 - 22,932 7,397 5,172 6,237 - 18,806 846 793 2,487 - 4,126

Indirect Costs 1,214 334 1,176 - 2,724 1,129 418 943 - 2,490 85 (84) 233 - 234

Total - all Costs 9,457 6,299 9,900 - 25,656 8,526 5,589 7,180 - 21,296 931 710 2,720 - 4,360

(87) (700) - - (787) (87) (25) - - (112) 0 (675) - - (675) 9,370 5,599 9,900 - 24,869 8,439 5,564 7,180 - 21,184 931 35 2,720 - 3,685

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Personnel 675 - 124 - 799 675 - 65 - 741 (0) - 59 - 58

Collaborator Costs - CGIAR Centers - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Collaborator Costs - Partners 46 - 6 - 52 46 - 212 - 258 (0) - (206) - (206)

Supplies and Services 685 46 718 - 1,449 685 26 229 - 940 (0) 20 489 - 509

Operational Travel 89 - 2 - 91 89 9 97 - 195 0 (9) (95) - (104)

Depreciation/Infrastracture 755 - 28 - 783 275 5 - - 280 480 (5) 28 - 503

Sub-total of Direct Costs 2,250 46 878 - 3,174 1,770 41 603 - 2,414 480 5 275 - 760

Indirect Costs 213 7 174 - 394 190 6 117 - 313 23 1 57 - 81

Total - all Costs 2,463 53 1,052 - 3,568 1,960 46 720 - 2,727 503 7 332 - 841

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2,463 53 1,052 - 3,568 1,960 46 720 - 2,727 503 7 332 - 841

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Personnel 1,403 973 2,290 - 4,666 1,405 591 1,772 - 3,768 (2) 382 518 - 898

Collaborator Costs - CGIAR Centers - 700 - - 700 - 25 - - 25 - 675 - - 675

Collaborator Costs - Partners 328 2,011 1,960 - 4,299 329 2,741 1,250 - 4,320 (1) (730) 710 - (21)

Supplies and Services 1,794 2,152 2,808 - 6,753 1,795 1,517 1,915 - 5,227 (1) 635 893 - 1,526

Operational Travel 431 9 723 - 1,163 431 147 645 - 1,223 (0) (138) 78 - (60)

Depreciation 6 74 65 - 145 7 110 52 - 169 (1) (36) 13 - (24)

Sub-total of Direct Costs 3,961 5,919 7,846 - 17,726 3,967 5,131 5,634 - 14,732 (6) 788 2,212 - 2,994

Indirect Costs 661 327 1,002 - 1,991 662 412 826 - 1,900 (1) (85) 176 - 91

Total - all Costs 4,622 6,246 8,848 - 19,716 4,629 5,543 6,460 - 16,632 (7) 703 2,388 - 3,084

- (700) - - (700) - (25) - - (25) - (675) - - (675) 4,622 5,546 8,848 - 19,016 4,629 5,518 6,460 - 16,607 (7) 28 2,388 - 2,409

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Personnel - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Collaborator Costs - CGIAR Centers - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Collaborator Costs - Partners - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Supplies and Services - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Operational Travel - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Depreciation - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sub-total of Direct Costs - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Indirect Costs - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total - all Costs - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Windows 1

& 2 funds

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

FundsTotal

Personnel 595 - - - 595 595 - - - 595 0 - - - 0

Collaborator Costs - CGIAR Centers 87 - - - 87 87 - - - 87 (0) - - - (0)

Collaborator Costs - Partners 998 - - - 998 628 - - - 628 370 - - - 370

Supplies and Services 208 - - - 208 207 - - - 207 1 - - - 1

Operational Travel 144 - - - 144 143 - - - 143 1 - - - 1

Depreciation 0 - - - 0 - - - - - 0 - - - 0

Sub-total of Direct Costs 2,032 - - - 2,032 1,660 - - - 1,660 372 - - - 372

Indirect Costs 339 - - - 339 277 - - - 277 62 - - - 62

Total - all Costs 2,372 - - - 2,372 1,937 - - - 1,937 435 - - - 435

(87) - - - (87) (87) - - - (87) 0 - - - 0 2,285 - - - 2,285 1,850 - - - 1,850 435 - - - 435

POWB Approved Budget

ICRISAT

Totals for CRP

PMU


LESS: Coll Costs CGIAR Centers

Total Net Costs


Total Net Costs

Annual Financial Summary by Natural Classification


Actual

Actual


Actual

Unspent/VarianceActual

ICARDA

Actual POWB Approved Budget

GCP

Unspent/Variance

Unspent/Variance

Unspent/Variance

Unspent/Variance


Total Net Costs


Total Net Costs


Total Net Costs


Templates for CRP Reporting Report L131

CRP No. 3.6- "Dryland Cereals"Period: 01/01/2014 - 12/31/2014Amounts in USD 000's

Report Description

Name of Report: Financial Summary by Flagship Project




Summary Report by Flagship POWB Approved

Budget

Current Year Actual

ExpendituresUnspent Budget

Flagship Project 1 2,379 2,055 324 Flagship Project 2 9,537 8,044 1,493 Flagship Project 3 4,141 3,511 630 Flagship Project 4 2,894 2,459 435 Flagship Project 5 2,346 1,991 355 CRP Management/Coordination 3,104 2,166 938 Gender Strategies 1,256 1,071 185

Total – all Costs 25,656 21,296 4,359

ICARDA POWB Approved

Budget

Current Year Actual


Flagship Project 1 348 343 5 Flagship Project 2 1,784 1,508 276 Flagship Project 3 264 243 21 Flagship Project 4 125 125 - Flagship Project 5 315 279 36 Infrastructure Budget 732 229 503 Gender Strategies - - -

Total – all Costs 3,568 2,727 841

ICRISAT POWB Approved

Budget

Current Year Actual


Flagship Project 1 2,031 1,712 319 Flagship Project 2 7,753 6,536 1,217 Flagship Project 3 3,877 3,268 609 Flagship Project 4 2,769 2,334 435 Flagship Project 5 2,031 1,712 319 CRP Management/Coordination 2,372 1,937 435 Gender Strategies 1,256 1,071 185

Total – all Costs 22,088 18,569 3,518

Annual Financial Summary by Flagship Project

CRP No. 3.6- "Dryland Cereals"Period: 01/01/2014 - 12/31/2014Amounts in USD 000's

Report Description

Name of Report: Financial Summary by Flagship Project




Summary Gender Report - by Flagship Project POWB Approved

Budget

Current Year Actual


Flagship Project 1 486 461 25 Flagship Project 2 2,311 1,958 353 Flagship Project 3 528 468 60 Flagship Project 4 313 286 28 Flagship Project 5 453 397 56

Total – all Costs 4,091 3,569 523

ICARDA POWB Approved

Budget

Current Year Actual


Flagship Project 1 348 343 5 Flagship Project 2 1,784 1,508 276 Flagship Project 3 264 243 21 Flagship Project 4 125 125 (0)Flagship Project 5 315 279 36 Infrastructure Budget 732 229 503

Total – all Costs 3,568 2,727 841

ICRISAT POWB Approved

Budget

Current Year Actual


Flagship Project 1 138 118 20 Flagship Project 2 527 450 78 Flagship Project 3 264 225 39 Flagship Project 4 188 161 28 Flagship Project 5 138 118 20

Total – all Costs 1,256 1,071 185

Annual Financial Summary of Gender by Flagship Project

Report L211CRP No. 3.6- "Dryland Cereals"Amounts in USD 000's

Report Description

Name of Report: CRP Partnerships Report


Period:01 January 2014 - 31 December 2014Deadline: Every April 15th

Center Acronym Institute Country Windows

1 & 2

Window

3

Bilateral

funding

Center

Funds Total

ICARDA ARARI Amhara Agricultural Research Institute Ethiopia - - 11 - 11

DWR Directorate of Wheat Research India 21 - - - 21

RSI Resource Seeds International Mexico - - 199 - 199

INRA The National Institute for of Agricultural Research Morocco 25 - - - 25

Other - - 2 - 2

Sub-total for center 46 - 212 - 258

ICRISAT INRAN Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique du Niger Niger - - 23 - 23

IAR Institute for Agricultural Research Nigeria - - 12 - 12

ACE Abellon Clean Energy Ltd India - - 15 - 15

AU Aberystwyth University 6 - - - 6

AHBFI Africa Harvest Biotech Foundation International Kenya - 480 - - 480

AKF Aga Khan Foundation Mali - 120 - - 120

ARC Agricultural Research Corporation Sudan 3 - - - 3

FAMSEM/AMASSA AMASSA Mali - 289 - - 289

ARI ILONGA ARI ILONGA - Zonal Coordination Farming Systems Research - 7 - - - 7

ASEDES ASEDES, Bamako Mali - - (0) - (0)

AMEDD Association d’Eveil au Developpement Durable (AMEDD), Mali Mali - - 7 - 7

AOPP Association des Organisations Paysannes Professionelles Mali - 11 22 - 33

- Association Filly Wemanegre 6 - - - 6

AMSP Association Minim Song Panga Burkina Faso - - 30 - 30

AOPP Association the Organisation Paysannes Professional (AOPP), Koulikoro Mali - - 11 - 11

BGI BGI Tech Solutions Co Ltd China 200 448 - - 648

CRS MALI Catholic Relief Services Mali - 718 - - 718

CCSHAU CCS Haryana Agricultural University, India India - - 17 - 17

CMDT-Nord est Compagnie Malien de Development Textiles Mali - 120 - - 120

- Cornell University NIAMEY - - 18 - 18

DRD Department of research and development Tanzania 4 - 62 - 66

DSR Directorate of Sorghum Research India 4 - 74 - 78

EAGC Eastern Africa Grain Council (EAGC), Kenya Kenya - - 6 - 6

EU Egerton University, Kenya Kenya - - 8 - 8

EIAR Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), Ethiopia (covering also ARARI & OARI) Ethiopia - - 73 - 73

EUCORD European Cooperative for Rural Development Belgium - 74 - - 74

FG Fuma Gaskiya (Federation of Farmers), Niger Niger - - 6 - 6

GIDR Gujarat Institute of Development Research India 2 - - - 2

IER Institut d’Economie Rurale Mali - 267 107 - 373

INERA Institut de l’Environement et des Recherches Agricoles (INERA), Burkina Faso Burkina Faso - - 111 - 111

INRAN Institut National De La Recherche Agronomique Du Niger Niger 13 - 37 - 49

ISRA Institut Senegalais de Recherches Agricoles Senegal - - 25 - 25

ISRA Institut Senegalais De Researches Agrioles Mali 4 - - - 4

IAR Institute for Agricultural Research (IAR), Nigeria Nigeria - - 52 - 52

IER Institute of Economy Rural (IER), Bamako Mali - - 22 - 22

IITA International Institute of Tropical agriculture - - 26 - - 26

ILRI International Livestock Research Institute Kenya 31 - - - 31

IRAMBA IRAMBA District Council Tanzania - 7 - - 7

JAU Junagadh Agriculral University (JAU) India 1 - 17 - 18

KSU Kansas State University (KSU) USA - 16 11 - 27

KARI Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), Kenya Kenya - - 21 - 21

KSC Kenya Seed Company, Kenya Kenya - - 3 - 3

Kondoa Kondoa District Council Tanzania - 7 - - 7

Kongwa Kongwa District Council Tanzania - 4 - - 4

LUAB L’Union Albarka de Bokki, Niamey Niamey - - 2 - 2

MACRO Macrogen Inc 25 - - - 25

MPKV Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth (MPKV) India 7 - 25 - 32

Mali Mark Mali Mark Mali - 19 - - 19

MARI Mikocheni Agricultural Research Institute Tanzania 1 - - - 1

MAF-GOSS Ministry of Agricultural Forestry Government of Southern, (MAF-GOSS) Sudan Sudan - - 11 - 11

Moshi Moshi District Council Tanzania - 6 - - 6

Mwanga Mwanga District Council Tanzania - 7 - - 7

NACO NACO Seeds Tanzania - 8 - - 8

NARI National Agricultural Research Institute (NARI), Eritrea Eritrea - - 30 - 30

NARO National Agricultural Research Organization Uganda 3 - - - 3

NCMSL National Collateral Management Services Limited India 3 - - - 3

ORTM Office de Radiodiffusion Télévision du Mali Mali - 20 - - 20

PSU Pennsylvania State University USA - - 21 - 21

Rombo Rombo District Council Tanzania - 3 - - 3

SAME SAME District Council Tanzania - 6 - - 6

Serengeti Serengeti District Council Tanzania - 3 - - 3

SARI Serian Agriculture Research Institute Tanzania - 44 - - 44

Singida Singida Rural District Council Tanzania - 3 - - 3

SUA Sokoine University of Agriculture Tanzania - 34 - - 34

SKNAU Sri Karan Narendra Agricultural University (SKNAU),- Rajasthan, India India - - 4 - 4

SKRAU Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University (SKRAU),- Rajasthan, India India - - 13 - 13

TUB Technische Universitat Berlin Germany - - 12 - 12

NARO Ugandan National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO), Uganda Uganda - - 55 - 55

UGPCA Union des Groupement pour la Commercialisation des Produits Agricole Burkina Faso - - 23 - 23

UFD Union FAHAMAYE de Dantchiandou, Niamey Niamey - - 2 - 2

UHBT Union Harey-Bane de Tera, Niamey Niamey - - 2 - 2

ULPCD Union Locale des Producteurs des Cereales de Dioila (ULPCD), Koulikoro Mali - - 14 - 14

UMBF Union Made - Bane de Falwel, Niamey Niger - - 10 - 10

UACT Union of Agriculturists of the cercle of Tominian (UACT), Mali Mali - - 85 - 85

UGPCA Union the Grouement Pour la Commercialization des Produits Agricole (UGCPA), Dedougou Burkina Faso - - 5 - 5

UH Univerity of Hohenhium Germany - - 43 - 43

UAS University Of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur India 1 - - - 1

UCD University of California-Davis USA - 14 - - 14

UF University of Florida USA - - 15 - 15

UOH University of Hohenheim Germany - - 3 - 3

UoK, Germany University of Kassel Germany - - 38 - 38

UM University of Maradi Niger - - 15 - 15

UQL University Of Queens Land Australia 5 - - - 5

- University of St Thomas, USA MALI - 12 - - 12

UQ Univesity of Queensland Australia - - 3 - 3

VNMKV Vasantarao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth India 5 - 32 - 37

AMEDD Association Malienne d'Eveil au Development Durable Mali 18 - - - 18

CCSHAU CCS Haryana Agricultural University India 4 - - - 4

CERAAS Centre d’Etude Régional pour l’Amélioration et l’Adaptation à la Sécheresse Senegal 8 - - - 8

CIRAD Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le développement France 36 - - - 36

CERAASS Centre d'rtude regional pour I'adaption a la secherese Senegal 47 - - - 47

CRS Centre For Rabi Sorghum India 7 - - - 7

EIAR Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research Ethiopia 32 - - - 32

ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research India 32 - - - 32

INRA Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique Morrocco 32 - - - 32

INRAN Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique du Niger Niger 31 - - - 31

IER Institute of Rural Economy Mali 60 - - - 60

ICARDA International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas Syria 87 - - - 87

JAU Junagadh Agriculral University India 4 - - - 4

Kaz SRIAPG Kazakh Sсiеntific Rеsеarсh Institutе of Agriсulturе and Plant Groйng 27 - - - 27

INERA L’Institut de l'Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles Burkina Faso 9 - - - 9

MPKV Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth India 12 - - - 12

NASSARI National Semi Arid Resources Research Institute of NARO, Uganda Uganda 45 - - - 45

PAU Punjab Agricultural University India 4 - - - 4

RUFORUM Ruforum-2014-Year1 Funds 84 - - - 84

GAP-TAE The Gap Agricultural Research Institute of Turkey Turkey 27 - - - 27

Universite Abdou Moumouni (University of Niamey) Niger 23 - - - 23

UAS University Of Agricultural Sciences India 7 - - - 7

UQL University Of Queens Land Australia 23 - - - 23

VNMKV Vasantarao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth India 10 - - - 10

WACCI WACCI 50 - - - 50

Sub-total for center 1,044 2,766 1,250 - 5,060

Summary ICARDA 46 - 212 - 258

ICRISAT 1,044 2,766 1,250 - 5,060

GCP - - - - -

Total - all centers 1,090 2,766 1,462 - 5,318

CRP Partnership Report

Windows

1 & 2

Center

Funds TotalSummary Report - by CG Center

Window

3

Bilateral

funding


DRYLAND CEREALS Annual Report 2014.pdf

Documents