Thank you!

In November 2014 a consultation on the CGIAR Strategy and Results Framework (SRF) was launched as part of a more extensive engagement process being designed for the third Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD3). The consultation, implemented jointly by GFAR and the CGIAR Consortium, has two main phases.

In Phase 1, which ran from November 20th until December 12th 2014, people were invited to give their feedback, ideas and suggestions on the main elements of the SRF – and could do so through a number of channels made available such as emails, survey, e-consultation and social media. Across all of the channels we received around 250 contributions providing valuable feedback, suggestions and ideas  and these results have all been made available here. We want to extend a huge thank you to all those who participated in the consultation and took the time to provide valuable and extensive comments and ideas towards improving this roadmap to sustainable agricultural development.

The responses came from at least 48 different countries with a ratio of male to female respondents around 75/25. Respondents represented a wide spectrum of sectors from public to private, Universities and NGOs, CGIAR Centers and other research bodies, intergovernmental organisations, youth organisations, and even the media.

A few examples from each of the main elements of the SRF explored in Phase 1 of the consultation are highlighted below:

1. Thoughts on the Vision and Mission

From the survey, the majority of respondents agreed (combination of strongly or somewhat agreed) that the vision was both appropriate and exciting enough to attract investment. Comments emerging from other channels suggested that the vision and mission could be improved through better inclusion of the private sector as a mechanism, a focus on nutrition, and more indication of the societal gain, for example that:“Livelihood” should be mentioned in the vision, and “communities and society” in the mission”.

2. Thoughts on the System Level Outcomes (SLOs)

Responses in the survey indicated a strong agreement that the SLOs proposed are the main domains of impact for CGIAR and are equally important for the government/sector/discipline that people taking the survey represent. A few comments pointed to the need to address the role of “appropriate institutions (including policies, laws and mindsets) and infrastructure to make certain things happen (like an investment decision by a peasant or farmer, or a consumption decision).” And this could perhaps be reflected by including “rural development” in the SLOs. Others suggested that CGIAR use the SDGs as the main goals to align to.

3. Thoughts on the CGIAR niche

While there was overall agreement about the statements on the niche of CGIAR in the survey, comments from contributors in different channels cautioned against the idea that CGIAR was the sole or primary actor doing this alone but rather should be seen as doing these in collaboration and partnership with other key actors such as farmers, natural resource managers, governments, private sector, universities, and many other research and development organisations in developed and developing countries.

4. CGIAR’s research strategy

People commenting on the proposed principles for the CGIAR research strategy pointed to the following as gaps in how these have been formulated:

• Systems approach (but going beyond the science system and the ag production system i.e. farming systems)
• Inter- and transdisciplinary research
• Research-for-development, and particularly be active in the dissemination process
• Mention of women and youth
• More cooperation and less completion between the research bodies (effectiveness, organizational resilience)

5.  Factors for successful partnerships

In the survey, the principles for partnership were all very well received with most respondents strongly and somewhat agreeing with all of them. A few people disagreed with some of the principles- except for one principle which no one disagreed with: ’4. Continuous communication. Consistent and open communication lines are critical across a large and diverse partnership, in order to build trust, assure realization of mutual objectives and create common motivation.

Amongst lots of useful suggestion on how to properly implement these principles for partnership, one comment was “The CGIAR need not always be the kingpin or leader of a partnership and should be prepared to play the role of supporting partner in an innovation process driven by other actors. A further important principle of partnership is sharing resources and credit for outputs and outcomes.”

A number of responses pointed to the need to properly develop different modalities and types of “Partnership” both within and especially outside of CGIAR bodies.

6. Relevance of and priorities for IDOs

While there are some interesting results from the prioritisation that individuals did of the IDOs and Sub-IDOs in the survey, there was a very rich set of comments and discussions on the overall IDOs. A series of contributions pointed to the fact that in order to achieve the IDOs and thus the SLOs, it will be essential to increase the capacity to innovate at all levels within agricultural systems with a quote from one contributor being highlighted by others:  “The IDOs reflect primarily material outcomes, but of much greater significance as outcomes will be the capacities that are developed by doing research in ways that transform the institutions of agricultural research and development”. This was supported by a proposal for a specific IDO  which would detail three dimensions of capacity to allow CRPs to build the necessary enabling conditions for sustained impact on other IDOs.

Others pointed to the necessity of the IDOs and sub-IDOs being gender sensitive and/or their progress measured through gender sensitive indicators and/or gender-disaggregated data.

7. Importance of 3 cross-cutting topics proposed

There was strong agreement expressed in the various channels about the importance of three cross-cutting topics proposed, however many did express a worry that  these may end up more as afterthoughts rather than being central to the IDOs and sub-IDOs listed, and it was suggested by a number of people that it would be more appropriate for CGIAR to include the three cross-cutting themes as IDOs and sub-IDOs.

There was a lot of discussion on capacity development and gender in particular. Again a proposal was made for capacity development to be also included as an IDO on ‘enhanced capacities’. And one interesting comment looked at: “Women and youth” are “target groups”, whereas “gender and diversity” would refer to issues, which would probably be a better way of expressing a cross-cutting theme and more likely to lead to addressing these issues in an inclusive (also of men) and system-oriented way across all IDOs.”

8. What could be made more easily accessible from research

In the survey respondents provided many specific ideas for types of data that they would like to be more easily accessible from CGIAR research. In the e-consultation there was an interesting discussion on the value of sharing research methodologies and pathways which can be made use of in national contexts.

If you are interested to see more of what people had to say then visit the SRF Consultation Results pagewhich provides links to various summary and synthesis documents of all the contributions to the consultation.

The results from the consultation will be used in two main ways. Firstly the results are being shared with the writing teams and groups responsible for the Strategy and Results Framework (SRF) so they can be aware of how stakeholders view the SRF and have the concrete ideas provided to use in their writing. Secondly the results will be shared and discussed at a meeting of representatives of the various groups of CGIAR  including donors, Fund Council, Centers, CRPs,Consortium Office and ISPC, to take place by mid-January 2015.

But this is not where it ends…

If you did not get a chance to participate in Phase 1 of the consultation or still have more you want to share and discuss, then we wanted to make you aware that there will be a Second Phase of the SRF consultation.

Phase 2: late January- early March 2015

In this Phase, stakeholders will be given an opportunity to consider and provide feedback and ideas on how the whole SRF has been put together and articulated. Opportunities to participate in this Phase will include the following (more details to be announced in January 2015):

• submit any responses via email to partnerships@CGIAR.ORG
• discussion of the SRF at key meetings taking place (meeting pack available)
• an online space to provide comments and discuss with others
• join an online discussion during a weekly ‘Call-in Program’-schedule to be made available in early January 2015

Stakeholder feedback from this second Phase will be used in the final revision of the SRF, due to be finalized for approval in March and April 2015.

Thank you again for your engagement in this process and we look forward to engaging with you more in 2015 and beyond.

Nadia Manning-Thomas and Alain Vidal, CGIAR Consortium Office Partnerships Team

Photo credit by Neil Palmer (CIAT)