Docstoc

week3

Document Sample
week3 Powered By Docstoc
					Name       Contact Information          Contribution
Simone     Facilitator of the Virtual   [Please note that Dgroups is currently having problems with delays in the delivery of the messages which may
Staiger-   Conversation                 need between 30 minutes and 24 hours to come through]
Rivas      CSO-CGIAR Initiative
           Virtual Conversation E-      Por favor ver el mensaje en español abajo
           mail: cso-cgiar-             La version française se trouve à la fin de ce message
           forum@dgroups.org            ________________________________________
           Virtual Conversation          Message in English
           Platform:
           http://www.dgroups.org/gro   We are approaching the end of the second week of our Virtual Conversation. This week and until today we got
           ups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-         contributions from more than 70 participants from all over the world and a large range of CSOs and CGIAR
           forum/index.cfm              centers. Many introductions continue to come in. They are most welcome!

           (s.staiger@cgiar.org)        Our current theme is about respective roles and goals in CSO-CGIAR collaboration. I attach a compilation of the
                                        contributions that we received so far this week (downloadable from our platform at:
                                        http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-
                                        forum/index.cfm?op=dsp_resource_details&resource_id=34962&cat_id=17499. I will also send you some
                                        selected pieces by Monday, which will certainly encourage further reactions.

                                        Next week we are still happy to receive new introductions and views on respective roles and goals, and we would
                                        like to start to reflect on how we can best cultivate our relationships.

                                        You may want to use the upcoming weekend to read through the postings from week two and make comments, or
                                        start thinking about the question that will be addressed next week. Please don‘t forget to have also a look at the
                                        interviews. Seven distinguished representatives from civil society organizations and the CGIAR contributed with
                                        their views on CSO-CGIAR engagement.

                                        It is a pleasure to facilitate this Virtual Conversation!

                                        Simone

                                        Virtual Conversation tips:

                                                Interviews: All interviews are accessible in one single Word document at:
                                                 http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-
                                                 forum/index.cfm?op=dsp_resource_details&resource_id=34635&cat_id=17499
                                                Download audio files: Each interview is in separate file in the resource section at:




                                                                                                                                                             1
         http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-forum/index.cfm?op=main&cat_id=17499 identified by
         the last name of the interviewee. If you have no audio player installed on your computer you can
         download one. One possible suggestion: www.real.com
        Don‘t hesitate to participate in English, French or Spanish. Postings or a summary of your postings in
         the latter two languages will be translated into English.
        Send me an e-mail (s.staiger@cgiar.org) to receive your registration information in case you have lost it,
         you want to change your subscription mode (you can receive one e-mail per posting or a daily digest), or
         you want to unsubscribe at any time.

__________________________
Mensaje en español

Está finalizando la segunda semana de nuestro Conversatorio Virtual y hemos recibido contribuciones de más de
70 participantes del mundo entero, de una gran variedad de representantes de las sociedades civiles y centros del
CGIAR. Continúan llegando muchas presentaciones que son muy bienvenidas!

Nuestro tema actual es acerca de los roles y objetivos en la colaboración entre las OSC y el CGIAR. Anexo una
recopilación de las contribuciones que hemos recibido en esta segunda semana (también descargable desde la
plataforma: http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-
forum/index.cfm?op=dsp_resource_details&resource_id=34962&cat_id=17499&setlang=3 ). El próximo lunes
les enviaré una selección de las contribuciones, que seguramente contribuirán a generar más reacciones.

Para nuestra tercera semana seguimos solicitando más presentaciones y también perspectivas sobre roles y
objetivos de las OSC y del CGIAR. Además queremos empezar a conversar sobre las oportunidades para cultivar
mejor nuestras relaciones.

Para los próximos días, los invito a leer las contribuciones de esta semana y a comentarlas; también les sugiero
reflexionar acerca del tema de la próxima semana. Por favor, no olviden echar un vistazo a las entrevistas: Siete
representantes de las OSC y del CGIAR comentaron la colaboración entre las OSC y el CGIAR.

Es un placer facilitar este Conversatorio Virtual.

Simone
Tips para este evento:

        Entrevistas: Todas las entrevistas son accesibles a través de un solo documento Word en:
         http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-




                                                                                                                      2
         forum/index.cfm?op=dsp_resource_details&resource_id=34635&cat_id=17499&setlang=3
        Descarga de los archivos audio: Cada archivo se encuentra separadamente en la sección de recursos:
         http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-forum/index.cfm?op=main&cat_id=17499&setlang=3,
         identificado por el nombre de cada entrevistado. Si no tiene instalado un reproductor audio en su
         computador, puede descargar uno, por ejemplo: www.real.com.
        No duden en contribuir en los siguientes idiomas: Inglés, Español y Francés. Contribuciones o
         resúmenes de las contribuciones en Español y Francés serán traducidos al Inglés.
        Por favor envíenme un mensaje a s.staiger@cgiar.org para: Recibir su nombre de usuario y contraseña,
         si los perdió; Cambiar su modo de recepción de los mensajes: de un mensaje por cada contribución a un
         mensaje por día o viceversa; Avisar que no quiere ser suscriptor de este evento.

______________________________

Version française de ce message

Nous approchons la fin de la deuxième semaine de notre Conversation Virtuelle. Nous avons reçu des
contributions de plus de 70 participants du monde entier et un grand nombre de représentants des organisations de
la société civile et des centres du CGIAR. Nous continuons de recevoir des présentations et elles sont
bienvenues !

Notre thème actuel tourne autour des rôles et objectifs respectifs de la collaboration entre les OSC et le CGIAR.
J‘ai le plaisir de vous joindre un recueil des contributions que nous avons reçues à ce jour (vous pouvez aussi le
télécharger à partir de : http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-
forum/index.cfm?op=dsp_resource_details&resource_id=34962&cat_id=17499&setlang=2. Lundi prochain je
vous enverrai une sélection afin de vous donner une opportunité de continuer à réagir.

Pour notre troisième semaine de conversation, nous continuerons à recevoir plus de présentations et points de vue
sur le thème des rôles et objectifs de chacun. Nous souhaiterions également engager une discussion autour des
opportunités pour optimiser nos relations.

Je vous invite à prendre du temps dans les prochains jours pour lire les contributions de la deuxième semaine, les
commenter et peut-être commencer à réfléchir au thème que nous aborderons la semaine prochaine. N‘oubliez pas
de jeter un œil aux interviews : Sept représentants des OSC et du CGIAR ont contribué avec leurs points de vues
sur leurs relations.

C‘est un grand plaisir de faciliter cette Conversation Virtuelle,




                                                                                                                     3
                                            Simone
                                            Conseils pratiques:

                                                   Interviews: Tous les interviews sont accessibles sur un seul document Word à:
                                                    http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-
                                                    forum/index.cfm?op=dsp_resource_details&resource_id=34635&cat_id=17499&setlang=3
                                                   Téléchargement des fichiers audio : Toute archive est identifiée par le nom de l´interviewé et est
                                                    sauvegardée dans un fichier à part sous la section Ressources. Si aucun logiciel audio n‘est installé sur
                                                    votre ordinateur, vous pouvez le télécharger à partir de: www.real.com.
                                                   Vous pouvez contribuer dans les langues suivantes: Anglais, Français ou Espagnol. Les contributions ou
                                                    les résumés des contributions en Français et en Espagnol seront traduites en Anglais.
                                                   N‘hésitez pas à me contacter (s.staiger@cgiar.org) pour: Recevoir l'information sur votre mot de passe si
                                                    vous l'avez perdu ; changer le mode de réception de vos messages d'un message pour chaque
                                                    contribution à un message par jour; quitter ce groupe de discussion.

A.K. Joshi   Deptt. of Genetics and Plant   My views on following "Based on your own experiences with CSO-CGIAR partnerships: What do you think
             Breeding                       the respective roles are or should be? What are the opportunities and positive experiences as well as
             Institute of Agricultural      frustrations, lessons learned and challenges?"
             Sciences
             Banaras Hindu University       What do you think the respective roles are or should be?
             Varanasi 221 005, India        The respective roles of CSO-CGIAR partners are to work in a synergistic mode to reduce hunger and to improve
                                            livelihood.
             Phone: 91-542-2367948          CSO‘s roles are/should be:
             Fax: 91-542-2368174                 1.   Understand problems faced by farmers that could be addressed through new/collaborative research
                                                 2.   Keep acquainted with new research and search for possible solutions out of available ones
             Email:                              3.   Find out ways of collaborative research with CGIAR partner not only to solve farmers problems, but
             joshi_vns@yahoo.co.in                   also to strengthen its capacity to play greater role
                                                 4.   Work as a bridge among different CGIAR centers to address various issues
                                                 5.   To work for creation of stronger linkages among various stakeholders including CGIAR centers
                                                 6.   Serve as information generation centre for native germplasm/technologies and with respect to
                                                     performance of the flow of germplasm/technologies from CGIAR
                                                 7.   To facilitate mutual exchange of useful germplasm for further research
                                             CGIAR center’s role is:
                                                 1.   Capacity building of CSO through
                                                          a.     Better germplasm and technologies
                                                          b.    Human resource development (training, visiting scientist program etc)




                                                                                                                                                                4
                                                   c.    Collaborative projects
                                          2.    Focused research on issues highlighted by CSO
                                          3.    To remain prepared for disaster management
                                       What are the opportunities and positive experiences as well as frustrations, lessons learned and
                                      challenges?
                                      Opportunities and positive experiences
                                          1.    Flow of useful germplasm and technologies
                                          2.    Sharing of experiences for best use of resources and quality research by CSOs and CGIAR centers
                                          3.    Generation of well trained human resource
                                          4.    Growth of research capabilities of national programs
                                      Lessons learned
                                          1.    Technology x location interaction must be kept in view while fine tuning or transferring a technology
                                          2.    Working in collaboration with target farmers is useful
                                          3.    Technology should be based on resource available with farmers
                                          4. Higher output is less important than higher profitability
Soumah   Assocation pour la           Chers collègues, voici quelques informations additionnelles
Malick   Promotion Economique de
         Kindia (APEK agriculture).   Collaboration
         APEK                          Le riz est l‘aliment de base en Guinée, mais la production nationale ne couvre pas totalement les besoins de la
         soumah_malick@yahoo.fr       population. L‘Etat guinéen en collaboration avec le secteur privé est toujours appelé à importer du riz des pays
                                      asiatiques pour satisfaire les besoins sans cesse croissants en nourriture des populations.
                                      Eu égard à ce qui précède, une lettre de politique de développement agricole a fixé des objectifs prioritaires dont
                                      entre autres le renforcement de capacités d‘organisation et de production des organisations paysannes pour la
                                      mise en place d‘un système de production communautaire des céréales de base.
                                      Le Centre international du riz (ADRAO), à travers le CGIAR, les SNRA et les différents projets de recherche
                                      pour le développement (CBSS, PLAR, ARI, etc.), développe depuis près de 3 ans un dispositif participatif
                                      d‘appui qui a permis à notre ONG APEK agriculture d‘atteindre un plus grand nombre de producteurs en matière
                                      de formation à la production des semences de qualité et la conservation des graines.
                                      En tant que ONG nationale en Guinée, actrice au développement local de la région de Kindia, l'APEK agriculture
                                      entretien de fortes relations partenariales depuis plusieurs années, non seulement avec les services nationaux de
                                      recherche et de vulgarisation, mais aussi avec les partenaires locaux et étrangers dans le cadre de l'appui au
                                      renforcement de capacités d'organisation et de production des producteurs membres de l‘association.
                                       Dans le souci de réduction de la pauvreté par l‘augmentation de la production et l‘amélioration des revenus des
                                      paysans, la collaboration entre l‘APEK, les services nationaux de recherche et de vulgarisation ainsi que les
                                      Centres internationaux de recherche (comme l‘ADRAO/CGIAR), repose sur les aspects essentiels suivants:
                                                - le transfert de technologie à travers les variétés, semences améliorées et d‘autres techniques
                                                agronomiques améliorées pour augmenter les rendements;




                                                                                                                                                        5
          - le renforcement de capacités des producteurs à travers la formation sur la conduite         des parcelles
          expérimentales en milieu paysan ou les champs écoles et aussi sur les techniques de production de
          semences communautaires avec différents outils comme la projection vidéo, les magazines et interviews
          à travers la radio rurale;
          - le renforcement de capacités du personnel d‘encadrement à travers les visites et la formation sur place
          - la fourniture des semences de pré base par les Centres de recherche tels que le CRA. Kilissi pour les
          céréales et l‘arachide et le CRA. Foulaya pour les cultures maraîchères et fruitières
          - l‘appui à la formation des paysans leaders semenciers pour la production ou la multiplication des
          semences de base, afin de satisfaire la demande des autres producteurs de la région voire de tout le pays.
Opportunités
La cassette vidéo sur la qualité des graines de semences du riz avec les femmes rurales de Bangladesh a été
traduite en français par l‘ADRAO et distribuée dans plusieurs pays africains et en plusieurs langues nationales.
Habituellement l‘APEK assurait la formation de ses membres producteurs à travers le personnel de recherche des
stations de recherche et les agents de la vulgarisation. Plusieurs supports pédagogiques ont été utilisées : la
narration et les explications techniques du chercheur, les croquis et illustrations, les projections de diapositives,
les commentaires à travers les radios rurales, etc. Mais l‘une des principales contraintes qui s‘est posée à nous est
la difficulté de regroupement des paysans en un temps record.
Depuis 2005, avec la collaboration entre les partenaires CGIAR-IRAG-APEK et surtout avec l‘introduction d‘un
outil comme la vidéo cassette tournée et expliquée par les paysans et paysannes de Bangladesh, a facilité ce
regroupement et a permis d‘atteindre plus de 5 200 paysans en moins de 6 mois et les mois suivants, ce chiffre
pourrait être doublé et voire triplé, dans l‘objectif d‘informer, sensibiliser et former tous les membres producteurs
de notre association.
D‘autres thèmes pourront être montés à travers des vidéos ou d‘autres outils comme la radio rurale, la TV, parce
que le paysan dit souvent que, ce je cite : « pour mieux comprendre, il vaut mieux voir qu‘écouter ».
La collaboration avec la radio rurale de la région de Kindia dans l‘information, la sensibilisation et la formation
des couches paysannes par le biais des magazines, des scénettes, des interviews est une illustration éloquente.
 Notre ONG encourage et félicite cette collaboration pour ce succès obtenu et exprime le souhait de voir renforcer
ce partenariat à travers des appuis financiers à travers les innovations locales gage d‘un agriculture durable et
stable dans les pays en voie développement.
Dear all,

[rough translation by Simone]

Please find below some additional information

Collaboration




                                                                                                                    6
Rice is the basic crop in Guinea, but the national production does not cover completely the population‘s needs.
Government in collaboration with the private sector always must import rice from Asian countries in order to
satisfy the constantly increasing need of food of the population.
Taken this into account, a rural development policy has established priority objectives, i.e. the strengthening of
capacities in farmer community organization and production in order to establish a community based production
system of basic cereals.
The CGIAR international rice center (DRAO, or WARDA), the SNRA and the different research for development
projects (CBSS, PLAR, ARI, etc.), have been developing for the last 3 years a participatory support structure.
This allowed our NGO APEK to reach far more producers and train them in the production of quality seeds, and
in seed conservation techniques.
We are a national NGO in Guinea, and act for the development of the Kindia region. We have strong
relationships for many years, not only with national research and extension services, but also with local and
international partners in the framework of capacity building, organizational strengthening, and support in
production of the members of our association.
Our partnerships is based on the following aspects:
      Technology transfer through varieties, improved seeds, and other agro—technologies that help to
          increase productivity.
      Capacity strengthening of farmers and producers through training in field trials in rural areas or farmer
          field schools, as well as training in community based seed production techniques using tools and media,
          like video, and rural radio;
      Strengthening of support staff through field visits and training.
      Delivering of seeds from research centers, like CRA, KILISSI, and Foulaya.
      Support in the training of community leaders in seed multiplication

Opportunities
The video on rice seeds with the rural women farmers from Bangladesh has been translated into French by
WARDA and distributed in several African countries and in several local languages.
APEK used to do be in charge of farmer trainings, but the challenge that we encountered is to group efficiently
the farmers in a short time. Since 2005, and in collaboration with our partners CGIAR-IRAG-APEK, and mainly
with the introduction of new media, like the participatory video, we could reach more than 5200 farmers in less
than 6 months and this figure can be multiplied in the next months or so.
Other opportunities can be explored, like rural radio, local TV (farmers often say, that they prefer to watch and
see, and not only listen).
A good example is the use of rural radio in the Kindia region to inform, raise awareness, and train farmers
through stories, interviews, magazines.
Our NGO encourages and celebrates this collaboration and the achieved success. We would like to strengthen our
partnerships through financial support, and local innovation as a condition for sustainable agriculture in




                                                                                                                 7
                                       developing countries.
Santiago   Corporación PBA,            La colaboración con CIAT se remonta a los inicios del trabajo de la Corporación PBA, cuando el gobierno de
Perry      Colombia                    Holanda dio un apoyo financiero a 4 países para que cada uno montara un programa de biotecnología para
           sperry@corporacionpba.org   pequeños agricultores. En Colombia comenzamos en 1997 haciendo un diagnóstico participativo y una definición
                                       participativa de prioridades con los campesinos de la Costa Atlántica en los que se identificó la necesidad de
                                       trabajar en la obtención de semilla limpia y de alta calidad de yuca, plátano y ñame, cultivos de gran importancia
                                       en la economía campesina de la región y cuyo principal problema era la crítica escasez de material de siembra de
                                       buena calidad. En un principio se realizó la evaluación participativa de variedades locales e introducidas, con base
                                       en las cuales se seleccionaron ocho variedades de cada uno de los tres cultivos mencionados, para emprender la
                                       producción de semillas limpias a través de la aplicación de tecnologías de micropropagación. Especial énfasis se
                                       puso en que una parte de la producción de esta semilla se pudiera realizar en las distintas localidades, de manera
                                       que se combinara el trabajo en laboratorio con fases posteriores de multiplicación hortícola en viveros locales
                                       para obtener mayor producción, reducir costos y lograr una mayor participación de los pequeños agricultores en
                                       este proceso. Desarrolladas las metodologías y protocolos, grupos de pequeños agricultores crearon Empresas de
                                       Base Tecnológica en las que producen semillas limpias y certificadas y las venden a precios competitivos a otros
                                       cultivadores.
                                       En la actualidad, la Corporación trabaja en los siete departamentos de la Costa Atlántica colombiana y en varios
                                       departamentos de la zona andina. Además, coordina un Consorcio Andino de Innovación Participativa con
                                       Pequeños Agricultores en el que participan entidades de Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Perú y Venezuela. Sus
                                       trabajos con los pequeños agricultores se adelantan principalmente en procesos de fitomejoramiento participativo,
                                       estrategias de producción de semilla limpia en varios cultivos, manejo integrado de plagas y producción y uso de
                                       bioinsumos, manejo sostenible de suelos y aguas, investigación y desarrollo de sistemas agroforestales,
                                       metodologías de innovación participativa (IP), desarrollo organizacional y empoderamiento y desarrollo
                                       empresarial de los pequeños agricultores y vinculación a cadenas productivas y de valor dinámicas. Estos últimos
                                       aspectos han sido de fundamental importancia para que los procesos de innovación se concreten, se consoliden y
                                       se mantengan en el tiempo: la decidida participación de los pequeños agricultores en todas las fases y actividades
                                       de los proyectos es vital para que la investigación responda a sus verdaderos intereses y necesidades, para que los
                                       resultados se adecuen a sus condiciones socio-económicas y a sus sistemas productivos, para que sus
                                       conocimientos enriquezcan el proceso de investigación, para que los resultados se adopten rápidamente, pero no
                                       bastan para configurar un proceso de innovación duradero, sino que se requiere además garantizar que los
                                       productos y servicios tecnológicos desarrollados se sigan ofreciendo a través de empresas de los pequeños
                                       agricultores (Empresas de Base Tecnológica), que los campesinos e indígenas creen organizaciones sólidas y
                                       empresariales, que se vinculen a cadenas productivas y de valor dinámicas en las que cuenten con un mercado
                                       relativamente seguro para sus productos, sus servicios y sus innovaciones tecnológicas en el mediano y largo
                                       plazos, que lo hagan a través de organizaciones que tengan un marcado carácter empresarial y – tal vez lo más
                                       importante – que se empoderen y se capaciten para que ellos mismos sigan liderando sus procesos de desarrollo y
                                       de innovación.




                                                                                                                                                              8
Los éxitos hasta ahora obtenidos se deben, en gran medida, al establecimiento de unas sólidas alianzas en las que
se conforman verdaderos equipos de trabajo interinstitucionales y multidisciplinarios, en que las funciones de
cada cual están claramente establecidas, pero todos nos consideramos comprometidos y responsables con los
resultados de los procesos. Estas alianzas y funciones son:
     1. Las organizaciones campesinas e indígenas: son el alma de las alianzas y tienen la función de ejecutar y
          liderar todas las actividades de los proyectos en cada localidad: realizan los experimentos, producen los
          insumos tecnológicos, manejan sus empresas y negocios, organizan los planes de capacitación, gestionan
          y manejan recursos, amplían la influencia del trabajo y de los procesos de innovación, etc. Ellas dirigen
          los proyectos de innovación tecnológica
     2. La Corporación PBA: coordina las actividades generales y de gestión y es responsable del
          acompañamiento y capacitación a las organizaciones de productores en las áreas de desarrollo
          organizativo y empresarial, empoderamiento, participación y vinculación a las cadenas productivas y de
          valor
     3. CORPOICA y las universidades participantes (Nacional, de Córdoba, de Sucre, etc.): realizan el
          acompañamiento y capacitación a las organizaciones de productores en las áreas tecnológica y de
          Buenas Prácticas Agrícolas y de Manufactura
     4. CIAT: realiza componentes de investigación más básica o estratégica que apoyan los procesos de
          innovación participativa. En el caso de la producción de semilla limpia, por ejemplo, se ha encargado de
          poner a punto las metodologías de producción de bajo costo utilizando biorreactores de inmersión
          temporal, de diseñar los laboratorios campesinos de cultivos de tejidos y de capacitar a los
          investigadores y técnicos nacionales y a los campesinos líderes en la utilización de estas herramientas
          tecnológicas
No sobra señalar que en la actualidad ya hay numerosas organizaciones campesinas e indígenas que están usando
la semilla limpia, a escala comercial, con muy buenos resultados productivos y económicos, y que la demanda por
esta semilla está aumentando rápidamente, no solo por parte de agricultores de la región, sino de otras regiones
del país.

[rough translation by Simone]

Our collaboration with CIAT started right at the beginning when Corporación PBA received financial support
from the Dutch government. The support was given to 4 countries in order to allow each of them to develop a
biotechnology program for small-scale farmers.
In Colombia we started in 1997 with a participatory diagnosis of the priorities of the farmers of the Atlantic coast.
The results were the need for clean quality seeds of cassava, plantain, and coco yam – all very important crops for
this region with the mayor problem of lack of quality seed material.
At the beginning we started to evaluate in a participatory manner the local varieties and we selected 8 varieties for
each of the three crops. We used micro propagation techniques to produce the quality seeds. We paid specific




                                                                                                                        9
                                     attention in organizing this production within the communities, in order to be able to combine the work in the
                                     laboratories, with the multiplication in local greenhouses. This allowed increasing productivity, reducing costs,
                                     and involving actively small farmers.
                                      Once the technology set up, groups of small farmers organized themselves to produce clean and certified seeds,
                                     which they sell to other farmers for competitive prices.
                                     Currently, our corporation works in seven areas of the Atlantic coast and in several areas of the Andean zone. We
                                     also coordinate an Andean Consortium dedicated to participatory innovation with small-scale farmers in which
                                     Bolivia, Colombia, Peru, and Venezuela are involved. Its focus is mainly in participatory plant breeding,
                                     strategies for clean seed production of several crops, integrated pest management, and production and use of
                                     biological ingredients, sustainable soil and water management, agro forest research and development,
                                     participatory innovation methodologies, organizational development and empowerment of small-scale farmers
                                     and linkages to dynamic value market chains.
                                     These last aspects have been crucial to achieve and foster concrete, strong and last longing innovation: the
                                     participation of farmers in all the steps and activities of the projects is fundamental to assure that the research is
                                     responding to real interests and needs, and corresponds to social and economic conditions, as well as to existing
                                     production systems. This also allows to enrich the research process, and to achieve prompt adoption of the results.
                                     We need to guaranty that the products and services that have been jointly developed are offered continuously
                                     through small farmer enterprises, and we need that indigenous farmers start their own strong organizations, that
                                     they link to secure markets for their products, and that they are sufficiently empowered and trained to lead their
                                     own development and innovation processes.
                                     The successes that we have achieved so far are mainly due to the establishment of solid alliances in which we
                                     have build real inter institutional and multidisciplinary teams with clear defined roles, and shared commitment
                                     and responsibility of all those who are involved in the process.
                                     The different roles are as follows:
                                          1. Indigenous and farmer organizations: They coordinate the whole process of technological innovation in
                                               each community.
                                          2. La Corporación PBA: overall coordination and support, training, and linkages to market chains.
                                          3. CORPOICA and participating universities (Nacional, de Córdoba, de Sucre, etc.): support and training in
                                               good practices, and technologies.
                                          4. CIAT: basic research, i.e. in low cost seed production, design of farmer laboratories..

                                     We have achieved significant impact so far: many local farmer and indigenous organizations are using clean
                                     quality seeds, and selling them with good results. The demand is increasing rapidly in our region, and in the rest
                                     of the country.
Tom         CRS , Kenya              Maria -
Remington   tremington@crsearo.org   We all agree that the CG centers need to engage broadly - in different and multiple partnerships. Though not
                                     involved at all in NGOC, I had a sense that it was geared towards what I call the 'advocacy' NGOs rather than at




                                                                                                                                                          10
                                               'implementing' NGOs. Working for a large implementing NGO such as CRS, I often see a disconnect between
                                               our positions and those of the advocacy NGOs. I don't believe CRS was represented by the NGOC - that was
                                               perhaps not their mandate. I suggest that effective CSO-CG partnerships are forms of social
                                               rather than political capital and that the best of these operate without formal agreements. I note that the NGOC
                                               was funded by the CG - I would suggest that substantive partnerships require some sort of co-funding as well.
Marc           Ph.D.                           Thanks to Mike and Tom Remington for interesting thoughts on the issue I raised earlier.
Cohen          Research Fellow                     My experience -- as someone who does the actual research at one of the centers, to use Mike's terminology --
               Food Consumption and            is that for IFPRI, our engagement with NGOs and CSOs in our research work has been extremely positive. We
               Nutrition Division              have collaborated on numerous projects with both international NGOs (Oxfam, CARE, World Vision, Bread for
               International Food Policy       the World- USA, German Agro-Action, EuronAid, International Center for Research on Women), and national
               Research Institute              and local organizations in developing countries (BRAC in Bangladesh, numerous NGOs and CSOs in India, and
               2033 K Street, N.W.             others). We are a little different from most of the centers in that most of our work is social science research, not
               Washington, DC 20006,           biological research.
               USA                                  For me, the open question is how as a system the CGIAR can benefit from discussion with civil society.
               Telephone: +202-862-5657        Transnational NGO and CSO coalitions are increasingly important players in policy debates; one could look at
               Fax: +202-467-4439              the role of transnational CSO advocacy in efforts to ban landmines or relieve developing country debt. How the
               E-mail:                         interlocutors are selected and who selects them are important issues, but when the centers, donors, and private
               m.j.cohen@cgiar.org             sector debate policy issues, civil society should also be at the table. That is where I see a vacuum at present, and
               Skypename: mjcifpri             that is why I find our present dialog and planned events next month really exciting.
               Web:
                                                   Tom's point about the distinction between operational and advocacy groups is apt, although many
               http://www.ifpri.org/srstaff/
               cohenm.asp                      organizations do both. A number of prominent operational groups were represented on the CGIAR NGO
                                               Committee during the course of its life (CARE and EuronAid, for example). But advocacy groups seemed to play
                                               a more prominent role, particularly towards the end. I think that the CGIAR system and the centers benefit from
                                               hearing the views of advocacy groups, even when those views are critical of the CG and the centers. The trick is
                                               keeping the dialog going even when there are disagreements. I do suppose that operational groups, with whom
                                               we are more likely to engage in research collaboration, are also the groups with whom we could most readily
                                               initiate a fruitful dialog on policy issues.
                                                  I'd welcome the thoughts of other conversation participants!
Telesforo J.   Project Coordinator             I'm very sorry for the late response.I'm in the farm wherein Internet is quite inaccessible.
Caminsi        Virlanie Foundation Inc.,        Anyway, upon reading almost all of your inputs, sharing, thoughts and ideals, I really felt fortunate for having
               Buhay Kalikasan Farm            such bright ideas.
               Project                          Pertaining to our experience working and collaborating with INIBAP- CGIAR, its wonderful. Way back on the
               Duhatan, Balayan Batangas       year 2002, when Virlanie foundation Incorporated- Buhay Kalikasan Farm project ventured to the idea of banana
               COntact No. 09166916351         production as part of the rehabilitation process for our "disadvantaged trainees" who are formerly street children
               Kenoses01@yahoo.com             along Metro Manila. With that practical and social vision in mind we mindfully negotiated with the INIBAP that
                                               led towards our positive partnership. From that years onwards and eventually up to this point the "partnership"




                                                                                                                                                                 11
that we have with the INIBAP- CGIAR is really beneficial and productive.
  As experience and lessons are concerned, the partnership produced triple desirable results. Firstly in the field of
research, for the INIBAP they were able to introduce and study new varieties of banana planting material where
concrete data and information were gathered. Secondly, though under the stage of research, Virlanie foundation in
general and the former street children under our care in particular were benefited during the process so much so in
terms of rehabilitation as they were able to learn additional life skill for their reintegration in the mainstream. And
thirdly, the positive appreciation of the community that in spite of the various banana viruses and diseases that
devastated the banana plantation in the area, there is still a way out there to revive the industry by adapting the
newly introduced germsplasm from the INIBAP.
 With regards to my own view point, INIBAP- CGIAR played a very vital roles as they implement the
organizational goals as manifest on the actual delivery of the services being offered to the community through its
partners. Anchored on the primary goal of providing sustainable food for the humanity towards poverty
reduction and probably eliminate hunger in the globe through research (preservation, development and
discovery). CGIAR provides the bigger horizon in trying to arrest poverty, hunger, famine and etc by assisting its
different CSO partners in allowing change be implemented in the grass roots level particularly to the needy, the
poorest of the poor by introducing newly develop agricultural technologies. In that regards, we in our part as
Virlanie Foundation Incorporated- Buhay Kalikasan Farm project working on the empowerment of former street
children and offering in them a brighter future in the approach of agricultural farming. This vision of our had
found a greater strength from the roles and goals your organization had embark with. You work in the large
specter of the society while we work in the specific marginalized group in our community. But again and again
we both work for the welfare and improvement of human lives.
I just want to point out, that with our partnership with INIBAP, though we are somehow special as the the nature
of our ogranization is concern, since from the very beginning from the signing of memorandum of understanding,
up to present, INIBAP is very much supportive to our undertaking, proper guidance though training and
monitoring had been provided unto us, and that ensures the maintenance of our positive partnership. I also would
like to take this oppurtinity to extend our heartfelt gratitude to the people behind CGIAR particularly the INIBAP.
Upon reading and reflecting to the different testimonies posted herein, I am deeply rejuvenated that CGIAR had
truly living out the vision of the organization. But one thing I am sure of is that, vision, mission and objectives is
meaningless not unless it is properly implemented and collaborated to the network agencies who are primarily
working on the grass root level. On the other hand, the network agencies have to truly implement what is ought to
be implemented and collaborated to the community in order to build success. So what matter most is the
continuous building up of "network'. A network that would absolutely imbibe the ideals of sustainability and
collaboration for the welfare of the needy. I do agree that CGIAR's existence and its continuous existence is
because of the needs being address and of the incoming needs being foreseen.
 With this understanding and aspiration I may humbly suggest in optimizing the CSO-CGIAR partnership, let‘s
recognize and truly believe on the key factors why the partnership had been started and maintain such as the trust
and honesty of each one, the respect of diversity and the positive appreciation for the welfare of the human life.




                                                                                                                     12
TIP [tip@tiptz.org]   Here are details of TIP partnership with CGIAR – CIAT on experiences, lessons learned, opportunities and
                      challenges.
                      TIP has been collaborating with CGIAR - CIAT since 2001 through Memorandum of Understanding (MoUs).
                      This collaboration has sought to bring together the respective strengths of these two organizations towards
                      successful implementation of Enabling Rural Innovations Projects. The MoU facilitates a two-way flow of
                      technical information from CIAT‘s collaborative research activities in Tanzania and globally, to the farm level
                      through the technical staff of TIP in Tanzania and to receive the proper feed back. This collaboration has been
                      possible because TIP and CGIAR – CIAT share a common objective of enhancing food security and rural
                      livelihoods for the poor while protecting the environment.
                      In 2001, jointly TIP and CIAT conducted a Pilot project in Northern Tanzania (Lushoto district); two outcomes
                      have been realized:
                           (i)           Institutionalization of the Market Access and Agro-enterprise development approach in TIP as
                                     a new component in its package of activities and
                           (II)          Adaptation of the Integrated Market Access and Agro-enterprise Development (MAAD)
                                     approach to make it simple and easy to apply in field conditions.
                      The MAAD approach consists of seven steps:
                                -      Entrepreneurship training
                                -      Election of market research committees
                                -      Farmers Participatory Market Research
                                -      Evaluation and selection of agro-enterprises
                                -      Design of Agroenterprise Projects
                                -      Implementation of Agroenterprise projects
                                -      Monitoring and Evaluation
                      This approach has focused on the community and is implemented alongside TIP‘s conventional step-wise
                      approach for organizational strengthening of farmer groups. Market access and agro-enterprise development
                      activities are aimed at building technical capabilities of smallholder farmers to interact with the market in an
                      organized and sustainable manner.

                      TIP has been implementing ERI by applying MAAD approach to its areas of operation and in various government
                      programmes and projects. As one of the greatest achievement with this partnership, TIP has facilitated
                      implementation of one of the component in the government programme namely Agricultural Marketing Systems
                      Development Programme (AMSDP); the component is entitled ‗Producer Empowerment and Market Linkages‘.
                      This was a potential opportunity for scaling out ERI approaches and methodologies in Northern and Southern
                      zones of Tanzania. Briefly the following have been achieved so far:
                               -    Transformation of smallholder farmers‘ mindsets from subsistence farming to profit making
                                   farming.
                               -     Enhanced capacity to do gross margin analysis that has improved negotiation skills and bargaining




                                                                                                                                         13
                                                         power.
                                                    -      Emerging of networking of farmers groups.
                                                    -      Product development for value addition
                                           The lesson learned is that the main problem leading to poverty in the rural areas is not a result of a lack of
                                          resources, but knowing how to mobilize them and use them to improve sustainable livelihood through realization
                                          of opportunities at their disposal.
                                          Opportunities:
                                          CGIAR – CIAT is well placed to link with development partners (CSOs) in order to contribute towards
                                          accelerating the intensification of agriculture and livelihood improvement of the rural poor in Africa.
                                          Challenges:
                                          Documentation is the key in improving methodologies and creating opportunity for other actors to learn.
                                          Documentation of successes, challenges, impact and conditions necessary for the approach to take off in all areas
                                          of implementation has been a challenge. This is partly due to meager financial resources allocated for this
                                          activity.
Elly        Regional Agro-enterprise      As I did in my introduction, at CIAT Africa we have worked with various CSOs in the areas of agroenterprise
Kaganzi     Specialist                    development. In most cases our work has involved capacity building in areas that are quite new and interesting to
            International Centre for      the CSO partners. Market analysis and agroenterprise development are not very common skills with many CSOs
            Tropical Agriculture          and our relationship with these institutions has been in the area of capacity building. This can some times mean
            Kawanda Research Centre,      that the relationship is in many cases one way with the CG providing tools approaches and methodologies. The
             email; e.kaganzi@cgiar.org   advantage with this is you feel that your relationship is valued because of the skills you bring. Obviously for
            www.ciat.cgiar.org/africa     purposes of scaling up approaches this is quite a valuable way of getting to the numbers.
                                          CSOs can also sometime not be very keen on research, due to their development mandate and trying to balance
                                          the research needs of the CG centre and the CSOs can be a challenge. For some of the CSOs we have worked
                                          with in Tanzania, they have tended to take certain elements of approaches that they have found interesting and
                                          dropped the rest. For instance experimentation and research was not seen as an important lement of agroenterprise
                                          development and the CSO tended to focus on agroenterprise development alone.
Zorrilla,   g.zorrilla@CGIAR.ORG          Dear all: With some delay I give you some comments on the experience of FLAR, the relationship with CIAT,
Gonzalo     Executive Director, FLAR      roles and goals.
            Latin American Fund for       In my introduction I explained that FLAR (Spanish acronyms for Latin American Fund for Irrigated Rice) is a
            Irrigated Rice                public-private partnership to support a regional rice research program whose final goal is the development of the
                                          rice sector in Latin America.
                                          It was started in 1995 as a result of declining funds at CIAT for irrigated rice research. Several private and public
                                          local institutions decided that they should invest some resources to maintain a program that had been very
                                          successful until then. The main concept behind this decision was that our rice sectors and our countries could not
                                          depend only on international funds to support research and development for our production systems.
                                          Another key aspect of this new organization was that farmers associations and private sector companies were
                                          involved and shared the responsibility of conducting the Fund. More than 80% of FLAR funds come from the




                                                                                                                                                             14
                                      country members, that means from poor institutions that make a huge effort to invest money in this international
                                      project. For this reason FLAR goals are on applied research that could quickly deliver technological solutions to
                                      farmers. If we do not show results it would be very difficult to the local organizations to maintain their annual
                                      investment in FLAR.
                                      The partnership with CIAT was a natural evolution. FLAR inherited CIAT‘s breeding program on irrigated rice
                                      and it has been growing since 1995, and we complement actions in rice research. While CIAT goes for high
                                      stakes in science and technology (interspecific breeding, new genes, biofortification, biotechnology, etc.), FLAR
                                      focus its resources in an applied breeding program that helps members to rapidly release new varieties and in a
                                      transference program to improve crop management.
                                      CIAT role as institutional and operational support for FLAR was also a fundamental part of the partnership. It
                                      would have been impossible to legally create FLAR (an independent international center) and invest in
                                      infrastructure and equipment; it would take a huge amount of resources. Being part of Agronature Scientific Park
                                      at CIAT solved this matter.
                                      One point that sometimes frustrates me in my relatively short experience with a CG center is the view that
                                      because we are working with farmers and rice sectors that are not only poor small farmers, we would not be
                                      focused on the main goal of poverty reduction or alleviation. In many of FLAR‘s member Countries poverty is
                                      mostly concentrated in towns and cities, not in rural areas, and it can only be fighted with an economy that grows
                                      and bring jobs. In almost all of these countries agribusiness is one of the driving forces of their economy, so I
                                      think that improving competitiveness of the rice sector directly helps on the final goal. Many of these countries
                                      are facing a progressive liberalization of their economies, mainly with TLC agreements with USA. Rice sectors
                                      are challenged by importations, and may almost disappear if they do not make profound changes in their
                                      production systems.
Jonas     Directeur de l'OPED         L'expérience de notre organisation (OPED- Organisation for Environment and Sustainable Development) et
Kemajou   B.P. 12 675 Yaoundé -       WorldFish Center remonte à plus de 6 ans de collaboration.
Syapze    Cameroun                    En effet, notre Organisation travaillait beaucoup plus dans l'accompagnement des communautés villageoises dans
          e-mail: oped_cam@yahoo.fr   le processus d'acquisition et de gestion des forêts communautaires. Il faut noter que la forêt communautaire est un
          / jksyapze@yahoo.com        espace forestier d'une superficie de 5000ha au maximum que l'Etat accorde à une communauté villageoise pour
                                      qu'elle puisse l'exploiter et utiliser les revenus issus de cette exploitation pour la réalisation des micro-
                                      infrastructures locales (le Cameroun est situé dans le Bassin du Congo, zone très riche en biodiversité et en
                                      ressources forestières et fauniques. Il dispose de plus de 22 millions d'hectares de forêts). Dans le processus de
                                      gestion des forêts communautaires, il n'est prise en compte dans les plans de gestion (une sorte de plan
                                      d'aménagement fortestier) que des ressources forestières et fauniques. Les ressources aquatiques sont totalement
                                      ignorées.
                                      Aussi, nous avons pris attache à World Fish Center pour discuter de la gestion des cours d'eau et de leurs
                                      contenus en poissons et plantes aquatiques. World Fish conduisait déjà des études dans la zone de Kribi où l'on
                                      trouve des espèces de poissons endémiques très prisées pour les aquariums.
                                      Ensemble, nous avons effectué plusieurs missions permettant à World Fish de poursuivre ses travaux de




                                                                                                                                                       15
recherche et à notre organisation de tirer les leçons des travaux de World Fish pour influencer sur les politiques
nationales en matières de gestion des forêts communautaires (prise en compte des ressources aquatiques) et
surtout permettre aux populations locales de tirer le meilleur profit de la gestion des ressources aquatiques de
leurs terroirs. des constats suivants ont été relevés:

1) Les populations locales effectuaient la pêche des poissons d'aquarium, espèces endémiques, pour les vendre
aux intermédiaires à des prix ridicules de FCFA 25 une paire (USD 1 = FCFA 550)
2) Les intermédiaires revendaient la même paire de poissons aux revendeurs basés à Douala à près de FCFA
200 la paire
3) Les revendeurs exportaient sur le marché international à plus de FCFA 2500 la paire
4) On enrégistrait une perte de plus de 80% de mortalité des poissons du fait de la mauvaise manipulation, ce qui
naturellement était très préjudiciable sur les ressources et sur la marque Cameroun
5) Tous le bénéfice était pour les revendeurs, et les communautés n'avaient presque rien, moins de 5% du prix à
l'échelle internationale
6) Les quantités pêchées étaient incertaines et insuffisante de fait que la manière de pêcher des populations était
non durable et très critique pour les espèces.

Face à ces constats, WorldFish et OPED ont travaillé ensemble pour mettre sur pied plusieurs actions:

a) OPED et WorldFish ont soumis et obtenu le prix ''World Bank Global Development MarketPlace 2005'' d'une
valeur de USD 150,000 pour mettre en oeuvre des activités du projet de conservation et de valorisation des
ressources aquatiques de Kribi
b) Les paysans pêcheurs ont été sélectionnés dans les villages de la zone du projet en fonction de leur motivation
et de leur engagement à contribuer à la gestion durable des ressources aquatiques de leurs terroirs
c) Les paysans pêcheurs ont été formés sur des techniques de pêches et surtout sur la construction des
microétangs respectant les exigences du milieu naturel pour élever et conserver leurs produits de pêches afin de
disposer des quantités et variétés suffisantes pour répondre aux besoins du marché
d) Les paysans se sont regroupé au sein d'un GIC (Common Initiative Group) d'aquaculteurs, lequel groupe est
aujourd'hui fonctionnel et négocie collectivement les prix du poisson
e) Nous avons développer un partenariat avec une entreprise local GULF Aquatic qui sert de relais des
populations dans la commercialisation, réduisant de ce fait la file d'intermédiaires
f) La première expedition des poissons sur le marché international a permi d'enregistrer de très bons résultats,
plus de 90% de taux de survivance alors que par le passé on a noté plus de 80% de mortalité. de même les ventes
se sont élevées à plus de FCFA 500 la paire, soit 20 à 25 fois plus que le prix payé au paysans avant notre
intervention
g) OPED et World Fish ont ouvert un bureau à Kribi pour se rapprocher davantage des paysans. Le Bureau est
considéré comme le lieu de réunion des paysans. En même temps, il est ouvert aux organisations intervenant dans




                                                                                                                     16
le domaine de la conservation et la lutte contre la pauvreté: Nom du bureau: Centre Multipartenaires pour la
Conservation et le Développement

Voilà en quelques points notre expérience avec WorldFish. Nous exprimons d'ailleurs le souhait de dynamiser
davantage notre partenariat de manière à capitaliser les résultats des travaux de WorldFish au Cameroun dans le
processus d'appui aux paysans. La question du lien entre recherche et développement trouve ici quelques
éléments de la problématique.

[rough translation by Simone]

The collaborative experience of OPED (OPED- Organisation for Environment and Sustainable
Development) and the Worldfish center is now more than 6 years old. Our organization works mainly in
accompanying village communities in the process of acquiring and managing community forests -
spaces of 5000 ha maximum, provided by the State to the communities in order to allow them to manage
this area, and use the benefits for local micro-infrastructure developments. Cameroon is located within
the Congo basin, a zone with high degrees of biodiversity and rich in plant and animal resources, with
more than 22 Mio hectares of forests. In the process of community forest management water resources
are generally not at all taken into account. In our partnership with Worldfish we discuss watershed
management, including fishes and plants. Worldfish had already ongoing studies in the Kribi zone where
you can find endemic fishes, in high demand for aquariums. Together, we executed several projects,
which allowed Worlfish to pursue its research while allowing us to learn from them and to influence
national politics in order to get water resources on the agenda of community forest management. Local
populations have been the biggest beneficiaries, and the conclusions are as follows:

    1.   The local populations sold the fishes for aquariums to intermediaries at ridiculous prices :
         FCFA 25 the couple (USD 1 = FCFA 550)
    2.   Those intermediaries sold the fishes to sellers based in Douala for FCFA 200 the couple.
    3.   The sellers put them on the international market for more than FCFA 2500 the couple.
    4.   A loss of more than 80% was registered because of bad handling of the fishes, which was
         obviously a prejudice for Cameroon resources and trademarks.
    5.   All benefits went to the intermediaries, and less then 5% of the international price was for the
         communities.
    6.   The quantities of fishes were not sufficient and supply was uncertain. The fishing technique was
         not sustainable and dangerous for the species.




                                                                                                                  17
                                       Worldfish and OPED set up jointly an action plan:

                                           OPED and Worldfish won the ''World Bank Global Development MarketPlace 2005'' for USD
                                            150,000 to set in place conservation projects for aquatic resources in Kribi.
                                           Farmer fishers have been selected to contribute to the project. Selection criteria were motivation
                                            and engagement.
                                           The fishers have been trained
                                           The farmers organized themselves as GICs (Common Initiative Groups) and are able today to
                                            negotiate the prices collectively.
                                           The first delivery of fishes in international markets gave surprising results: a survival rate of
                                            more than 90%, sells for FCFA 500 the couple, which means 20 to 25% more.
                                           OPED and World Fish opened an office at KRIBI, which is noe the meeting place for the
                                            farmers. The office is also open to other organizations which work in rural development.

                                   This is a summary of our partnership with Worldfish. We would like to extend our collaboration, in order to scale
                                   up the results of our work in Cameroon. The issue of the relationship between research and development is
                                   hereby addressed.
Dorcas   Executive Director        Dear all,
Otieno   Kenya organization for    Having informed you earlier that the kenya organization for environmental education promotes environmental
         Environmental Education   action learning in schools and community groups, the monitoring of the implemetation of MDGs amongst
         berylotieno@yahoo.com     community groups and capacity building of comminities to to engage in sustainable community development etc..
                                   We have experienced a number of challenges from the variouse programmes we run. For example the eco-schools
                                   programme (wherere Icraf is on the advisory board) requires that schools form committees (who's membership
                                   includes community representatives) to steer the environmental conservation both at school and in the
                                   community. This initiative has demonstrated the importance of equal participation by partners/stakholders
                                   involved at various levels. For this to happen stakeholder needs and interests must be prioritised and their roles in
                                   the project identified right throught the project cycle ie from the planning, implementation to the monitoring
                                   stage. We found that if a micro-project implemented in school or community did not benefit one of the parties, it
                                   failed nomatter what investments were put in. Where stakeholder needs based participation has been catered for,
                                   we have had successful formal (school based enviroronmental education)and non formal( community based
                                   environmental education) happening simulteniously from microprojects initiated specifically to adress school and
                                   community environmental and development needs.
                                   Stakeholder needs based participation and equal partnership automatically leads to project ownership and
                                   therefore contribution to project expenses. In the absence of this transparent bottom up approach communities
                                   inparticular expect that who-ever has initiated the project takes most responsibilities. The bottom line of all
                                   partnership projects is trust, friendship and transparency.




                                                                                                                                                      18
NACHIKE      nachiket.mor@icicibank.co    Subject: [cso-cgiar-forum] RE: Cassava Partnership in Nigeria
T MOR        m                            This [contribution by Chiedozie Egesi] is a really important contribution. ICICI Agriculture Knowledge Forum
/CORPOR                                   (IAKF) is a research-NGO that is starting to work on projects on the ground (the intial piece is Potato in Burdwan
ATEOFFIC                                  -- a large district in India - 7 million population) with the direct involvement of ICICI Bank so that it can be taken
E/IBANK/                                  to scale quickly. I wonder how IAKF may benefit from this insight -- it seeks to work closely with both small-
BKC                                       holder farmers (which is the predominant group in India generally) and large farmers.
Luan         Bioplant Albania             Bioplant Albania has for mission to develop the organic farming, to wellmanage the soil, biodiversity and others
Ahmetaj      albspring@yahoo.com          natural resources of the country. It is working with other organizations on prepering and implementing of some
                                          agroecological alternatives, national strategies and programmes on food security and environment protection in
                                          Albania.
                                          Our organization consider very important the establishment of relationship and partnership with CGIAR for
                                          developing joint programmes and projects on field of food security, poverty reduction and environment
                                          protection.
                                          For this is requered
                                          - to develop continually a dialog in wideworld expert level,
                                          - to discuss for more important issues on food security and poverty reduction
                                          - to develop specific projects, programmes and researches in agriculture
                                          with main goal to implement the best agricultural alternatives which contribute for ensuring a better life quality,
                                          natural resources wellmanagment and environment protection in wideworld level.
Rene van     ETC Foundation in            Apologies for joining you a bit late in this discussion. But there is still time before we meet in Washington.
Veenhuizen   Leusden, the Netherlands     My name is René van Veenhuizen, and I work for the ETC Foundation in Leusden, the Netherlands. ETC has
             r.van.veenhuizen@etcnl.nl    been active in the field of agricultural development for more than 30 years now, facilitating farmer
                                          experimentation and participation in research, endogenous development and multi-stakeholder processes.
                                          ETC and IWMI (Ghana and India Offices) are member of the RUAF global collaborative partnership (Resource
                                          centres on Urban Agriculture and Food Security). The overall goal of the partnership is to contribute to urban
                                          poverty reduction, urban food security, and improved urban environmental management. For more information on
                                          the partnership and for other information on the subject please visit www.ruaf.org, which will link you to the
                                          different websites of the RUAF Partners.
                                          I am working now for 6 years with ETC and RUAF, with special interest in land and water issues and knowledge
                                          management. I am the editor of the English edition of the Urban Agriculture Magazine of the RUAF Foundation.
                                          IWMI and RUAF provide support to city governments and other local organizations in India and West Africa, in
                                          participatory processes of action planning, research and policy formulation on urban and peri-urban agriculture
                                          with remarkable results. The partnership offers opportunity for CGIAR and CSO to respond to urbanization
                                          related food and environmental challenges and thereby contributing to MDGs 1 and 7 respectively.
                                          I am looking forward to learn from your experiences and share ours.
Kalyan       Agricultural Associates of   I should be thank ful to Simone and other moderators to motivate me to share our experiences with CGIAR
Chakravart   India                        partnership. Sorry for the delay in active joining of the forum, which was found soo valuable, enriching.




                                                                                                                                                              19
hy         #6-3-903/A/3, II-Floor,      We ( AAI) as a group of Agri professionals working Extension activities with chief themes of promoting Rural
           Surya Nagar,                 Knowledge centers and Contract Farming for Economic sustainability. Our approach is simple ... To be with the
           Rajbhavan road,              farmer from seed to seed, Provide technical advantage, Widen economic options, Bridge the knowledge gap, to
           Somajiguda,                  aid in decision making... to bring over all development.
           H Y D E R A B A D- 500        Our Interface point with the farmers is Our Knowledge Center which will be typically located in Taluk/ Mandal
           082                          where it can cater to the services of 20 villages in and around and also provide opportunity to 4-5 rural
           Andhra Pradesh, India        employment.
                                        Approach : Sensitization -- Standardization-- Popularization
           Help line: +91-40-           Our association with CGIAR has really helped us to deliver the services to the farmers
           55737672, 40038381,98499     effectively and efficiently by all our team. The perceived advantages of the partnership were many fold both for
           10975                        the ICRISAT and AAI and mainly to farmers. In Technical front, Marketing, Networking part we got good
           URL : www.aaiagri.com        leverage to utilize ICRISAT rich infrastructure and talent to deliver service to farmers. CG institute is also
           E-mail:                      benefited to reach the farmers through us and to assess ground realities and reorient / prioritize research
           aakruthi_aai@rediffmail.co   objectives. Farmers are directly benefited with dissemination of new technology developed at the institute.
           m                            One good example we can quote was , Our association played an instrumental role to popularize and facilitate to
           / aai_aakruthi@yahoo.com     notify and get released for ICRISAT bred short duration drought resistant Ground nut Variety ICGV - 91114 for
                                        the benefit of draught hit resource poor farmers of Anantapur District of Andhra Pradesh. The joint initiative of
                                        the partnership to take the variety to the intended farmers through innovative means resulted in a huge impact
                                        and impressed the state Govt considered for the release of the Variety to the said district at ICRISAT in July 2006
                                        with out much procedural hassles. This may be an example of CG- CSO partnership in effective technology
                                        dissemination for the benefit of farmers.
John       Jgarrison@worldbank.org      Marc [Cohen],
Garrison   Global Civil Society Team
           World Bank                   I work on the World Bank's Global Civil Society Team, and I agree with you that often the distinction made
           PHONE: +1 (202) 473-         between "policy advocacy" and "service provision" CSOs is often a bit mechanical and doesn't reflect the
           4742                         symbiotic nature of these two activities and how they are often intermingled in many CSOs. While it is
           WEB SITE:                    often necessary to categorize the different types of activities carried out by CSOs (i.e. research, training, technical
           http://www.worldbank.org/c   assistance, policy analysis and advocacy, information dissemination) when carrying out stakeholder analysis, one
           ivilsociety                  shouldn't take this too far as most CSOs around the world carry out many of these activities out simultaneously.
                                        The various international CSOs you site in your email (i.e. Oxfam, Care, World Vision, CRS) all do policy
                                        advocacy at the global and nationals levels, as well as fund and/or provide agricultural services at the local level.
                                        To me the most important criteria to determine whether CSOs are willing and able to engage international inter-
                                        governmental institutions such as the CGIAR or the World Bank, is their decision whether to engage or not based
                                        on a political and institutional analysis of this relationship. If CSOs feel that they can influence and/or benefit in
                                        some way from this engagement they do so, if not they don't. This criteria is also more important than if they are
                                        "northern" or "southern" CSOs as you will find CSOs from both hemispheres in either camp: willing or unwilling
                                        to engage. Sometimes I hear here in the Bank that Northern CSOs tend to be more critical of the Bank and are




                                                                                                                                                             20
                                           less operationally focused, but all one needs to do is attend the World Social Forum (to be held in Nairobi, Kenya
                                           in 2007), to understand how critical Southern CSOs can be of what they perceive is "corporate globalization"
                                           being pushed by rich countries in the North.
                                           My impression, in reading the many emails of this exchange, is that countless CSOs have already been engaging
                                           the CGIAR network in a variety of ways for many years, and this is a good sign. Regarding the Bank, my
                                           impression is that more and more international, national, and local CSOs have also been deciding that they can
                                           both influence our policies and benefit from our information, research findings, training opportunities, and
                                           funding opportunities. This is a good trend for development around the world as it allows us all to better integrate
                                           the successful development initiatives at the micro level with improved macro policies and programs carried out
                                           by governments and international organizations.
Gonzalo    g.zorrilla@CGIAR.ORG            Chiedozie raised the same comment I made about FLAR on how to better help the poor, if focusing in small poor
Zorrilla   Executive Director, FLAR        framers or supporting bigger and more independent ones, that are able to accomplish new and promising
           Latin American Fund for         enterprises. He also confirms that international donors and I would say CG policy tends to give absolute priority
           Irrigated Rice                  to the first. Nachiket goes over the same topic.
                                           I think there is no discussion about the social impact that working with small farmers in developing countries will
                                           have and the need for help they have. But my point is that working with more commercial agricultural sector
                                           (usually but not always bigger farmers) can be also a very strong tool to fight poverty. It could be also a more
                                           powerful one, because if we make a good contribution in terms of technology, education or competitiveness as a
                                           whole, this sector may go along without further support. I haven‘t been involved in working with small
                                           subsistence farmers, but for me, Chiedozie‘s comments indicate that everything goes down when you leave…
                                           And as I said before, in many developing countries most of the poor are in the cities. I don‘t see any other stable
                                           solution for these people that a growing economy that makes jobs available. Commercial, competitive
                                           agricultural sectors do that. Many developing countries have good natural resources but they have undeveloped
                                           production systems that place them out of business in an open economy.
                                           I think the discussion should not be between small or big, but on which action is better for development as a
                                           whole in a specific situation. Donors and CG centers should make intelligent decisions and apart from strong
                                           projects focused in their traditional efforts with the poorest in the rural areas, identify and support projects on
                                           commercial agriculture that have the capacity to develop a competitive sector. In this environment private-public
                                           partnerships would be easier to identify and give a stronger support for the final goal.
Frank       Investigador Asociado          Gonzalo raises a very good point here: working with big farmers can help small farmers. However, we should do
HARTWIC    Instituto Internacional de      more efforts to show how this actually happens, for example via impact pathway analysis. In an upcoming IFPRI
H          Investigación sobre Políticas   discussion paper on PPPs in the CGIAR we find that some CG centers move upstream to work with advanced
           Alimentarias (IFPRI )           private sector companies, for example in the seed sector. However few efforts exist to show how under these
           c/o IICA, Apdo. 55-2200         arrangements working with the big can help the small.
           San José, Costa Rica
           Tel: +506-216-0251
           Fax: +506-216-0247




                                                                                                                                                             21
          Cell: +506-812-3777
          f.hartwich@cgiar.org
          www.ifpri.org

Or Thy    Prolinnova Secretary in    I do agree with the linkage between CSO and CGIAR because it is very important to built the partnership for
          Cambodia                   sustainable development and poverty reduction. It is important to note that CG center have played a significant
          Cambodian Center for       role in development and conservation of genetic resources as well as agricultural innovation. In contrast, the
          Study and Development in   innovation development and adaptation through transfer of technology from CG center does not meet the basic
          Agriculture (CEDAC)        need of the poor. So that the integration of farmers-researcher- educational institution-extentionist is very
          cedacnetwork@online.com.   important. Through the Promoting Local Innovation in Cambodia, we learnt that Cambodian Center for Study and
          kh                         Development in Agriculture (CEDAC) has started to conduct participatory local innovation development. In
                                     order to promote the innovation, we have organized exchange visit, workshop, training, pubication and
                                     distribution among stakeholder at local and national level.
                                     For example, System of Rice Intensification was adapted by farmer since 2000 under facilitating
                                     from CEDAC. CEDAC and the Department of Agriculture and Land Improvement of the Ministry of
                                     Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) organized a national workshop on System of Rice Intensification
                                     (SRI) held 7 August, 2006 at MAFF headquarters. The 165 participants included officials from all Provincial
                                     Departments of Agriculture, farmers, researchers, representatives of NGOs, and international organizations. The
                                     workshop reviewed the progress of SRI in Cambodia, sharing experiences and lessons learned, and promoting
                                     wider dissemination of SRI in Cambodia.
                                     Then on 10 August, the Minister organized a study trip for around 200 people from 11 provinces to visit SRI
                                     farmers in Tramkok district, Takeo province. This is where CEDAC and MAFF, with funding support from the
                                     Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), are working together to improve the situation of small-farm
                                     households through ecological agriculture. At the end of the study tour, the Minister instructed all directors of
                                     Provincial Departments to make sure that in each commune there should be at least one SRI demonstration. He
                                     strongly recommended the farmer-to-farmer extension approach, especially farmers visiting farmers, to promote
                                     SRI.
                                      Through these experiences, we have leanrt that the linkage between CSO and CG center are synergy effect to
                                     promote sustainable development as well as poverty eradication.
Martine   Communications &           My name is Martine Ngobo (see contact details below), and I currently work as the Communications and
Ngobo     Information Officer        Information Officer of the Sustainable Tree Crops Program (www.treecrops.org) of IITA (www.iita.org). I hold a
          STCP/IITA                  PhD (from the University of Wales, Bangor - December 2002) in agroforestry.
          POB 2008 (Messa)           STCP is a public-private partnership launched in 2000, which builds on an understanding that traditional
          Yaounde                    smallholder tree crop systems in West & Central Africa, which are part of an export-oriented cash economy, can
          Cameroon                   play an important role in stilmulating the rural economy and contribute significantly to increasing welfare by
          Tel.: +237 2237 434/2237   providing a stable platform for new investments and partnerships in the agricultural sector overall.
          522 Ext. 1025              STCP is active in Cameroon, Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia and Nigeria working with various partners




                                                                                                                                                    22
             Fax: +237 2237 437           (including farmer groups, the global chocolate industry & trade - the World Cocoa Foundation, donors and
             Email: m.ngobo@cgiar.org     development agencies - USAID, the public sector and policy makers, national governments and research
                                          institutes) to improve the economic and social well-being of smallholders and the environmental sustainability of
             URL: www.treecrops.org       tree crop farms.
                                          Before answering the Specific Question of this week, I would like to state that it is deemed important to
                                          distinguish between CSOs given the heterogeneity of organizational types and the diversity of roles alternative
                                          organizations perform. [Here is the definition I consider here for CSOs: "all types of formal and informal
                                          associations, organizations, and coalitions which are established on the direct initiative of individual members or
                                          groups of society, and which do not belong to the official governmental, political and administrative systems at
                                          any level"].
                                          This means that, the relationship between the CGIAR and CSOs will actually depends on the type of the CSO
                                          involved in the partnership.
                                          Working with CSOs - partners of STCP in West & Central Africa, I came to understand that there exists an
                                          unequality capacity between some (if not many) types of CSOs and CGIAR centers. CSOs often lack both human
                                          and financial capacity, and have to depend on the CG centers on many aspects during their collaboration. My
                                          single most important suggestion to optimize CSO-CGIAR relationship in this case will therefore be:
                                          donors must target building the capacity (all aspects taken into consideration: institutional, human, financial) of
                                          CSOs. At STCP, this is an important component/pillar of our work, as a successful collaboration with CSOs will
                                          definitely bring numerous benefits (for e.g. an enhanced sustainability of the Project's achievements).
                                          I am very pleased to join this virtual converstaion, and do look forward to a fruitful exchange.
Kalyan       AAI                          Dear Ngobo,Martine
Chakravart   aai_aakruthi@yahoo.com       Greetings
hy                                        We share common views with respect to, How CG- CSO Partnership model should be. The CSO really need to
                                          be strenghened in all fronts to deliver effectively as the resources are the limitation to do same though they(
                                          CSO) have the will and commitment.
DJEMALI      INAT, Tunisia                CSO-CGIAR relationship optimization:
M'naouer     djemali.mnaouer@inat.agrin   There is no a unique way of collaboration between CSO-CGIAR to achieve
             et.tn                        an optimization threshold. A variety of situation could be
                                          encountered. Some ingredients of optimization may be found in common
                                          where success is recorded.
                                          1. Interest (both should share common interest)
                                          2. Leadership (Vision, maturity, understanding and team spirit)
                                          3. A methodology (approach): Involvement of the main stakeholders (CSO, CGIAR, policy makers) is a key
                                          condition in bringing all key players in the process.
                                          4. Funds
                                          5. Evaluation of the conducted work




                                                                                                                                                           23
Manning,   IWMI                        Not sure if I am addressing something that has already been coming up, or starting a new topic, but wanted to
Nadia      n.manning@cgiar.org         express some thoughts about the CSO and CGIAR partnerships.
                                       The issue I have is that while we are in this Virtual Conversation highlighting and celebrating many exciting and
                                       valuable partnerships with CSOS, I feel that on some higher levels within the system, this kind of work and its
                                       impact is not counted. I feel that the Centres of the CGIAR are "stuck between a rock and a hard place" as a
                                       saying goes, as we are being asked to both improve the impact of our work and engage more with CSO partners,
                                       but the judgment of our work and its impact is still measured along traditional and formal lines based on
                                       publications in high ranking ISI journals. While of course research must maintain scientific standard and
                                       publication is highly important to maintain standards and disseminate findings, this avenue alone is not sufficient
                                       to address the major needs for capacity building, knowledge sharing, outreach and development action.
                                       It is almost like, the CSO partnerships are seen as an icing on the cake, something to put our energies into once
                                       we have completed the 'scientific requirements' first.
                                       But what I see from my experience in mine and others work at IWMI as well as many examples which have been
                                       highlighted during this conversation, is that the partnerships with CSOs are a vital pathway for developing
                                       valuable research outputs, while undertaking outreach, and achieving impact on many levels.
                                       Why does this discord exist then? Why do we still have our research standards, research priorities and mandate
                                       and impact defined and measured along narrow lines.
                                       I believe that if the CSO involvement and partnership and the results which come about, are not valued more in
                                       the system as a whole, then it will lack true sustainability, investment by Centres and researchers, and upscaling.
                                       Interaction and partnership with CSOs should not be seen as an add-on to our work, or as doing the CSOs a favor.
                                       It should be seen as mutual benefit, highly enriching CGIAR research, and moving towards greater impact.
                                        What do others feel?
Jagdeesh   Foundation For Ecological   I am picking up on what Gonzalo, Nachiket Mor and Chiedozie are articulating on small or big farmers and
PUPPALA    Security, POST BAG # 29     would try bring in my experiences with common property resources (and to a limited extent on private properties)
           ANAND,388001,INDIA          and working with small and big farmers.
           PHONE 0091-2692-261303      No arguments on what Gonzalo had to say about looking at what is working well for development rather than
           (office)                    whether big or small farmers are benefitting, particularly from a plurality view point. From a broader perspective,
                     261417            such an approach is acceptable but when one looks at the deeper dynamic on what kind of path disposseses or
           (Residence)                 works to the advantage of whom, some very critical issues emerge.
           FAX 0091-2692--262196        My experiences of working with village communties as well as in evaluating other big projects in rural India on
           jagdeesh@fes.org.in         natural resource management throw up some issues and I would share some of them which are relevant here.
                                        1) It is politically infeasible to approach the poor if we do not include the big farmers.( because of the class and
                                       caste heirarchies prevalent in rural India), particularly when you are working on common properties like forests
                                       and water.
                                        2) Big farmers tended to marginalise the participation of the poor by way of exclusion from the collective and/or
                                       decision making, privatising the resources or access, arriving at mechanisms that are not affordable by the poor
                                       and so on.




                                                                                                                                                          24
                                        3) Big farmers looked at natural resources (particularly forests) from a merchandising and market perspective
                                       where as the poor and women relied on them for consumption or subsistence.
                                        4) Farm families bordering the poverty line made quick benefits from savings programmes and their incomes
                                       improved but the pitfall was that they behaved no better (on equity related issues) towards the other very poor (
                                       much below the so called poverty line) in the village, questioning assumptions on trickle down theories.
                                        5) Sadly ill conceived/implemented interventions reaffirm the local status quo of power relationships, leaving the
                                       very poor further disenfranchised.
                                        6) Donors and implementing agencies (including CSOs) are increasingly more inclined for short term and
                                       merchandisable benefits addressing major sections of the villages (not necessarily the smaller section of the very
                                       poor), displacing the coping mechanisms of the very poor. Whereas working for the very poor requires a
                                       sensitive, long drawn, multi pronged approach where benefits are in increments, from a diverse set of sources,
                                       economic also but not necessarily monetory. The more important gains were about self esteem, which would go a
                                       long way in local fallouts on distributive justice.
                                        I guess I should end here with a poser .. Whether development is an apolitical construct where we can afford to
                                       say that public research and funding could go to the big farmers leaving small farmers to find their ways to cities.
                                       In Indian context this would mean that about 400 million would have to leave to the cities leaving their parcels of
                                       land which might not make them rich but at least fends them a meal a day to get by.
Jagdeesh   Foundation For Ecological   This is in continuation to the conversation on the Frozen collaboration...? picked up by Marc, Tom, John and
PUPPALA    Security, POST BAG # 29     Mike and while subscribing to most of what has been already said, I wanted to add a couple of layers from the
           ANAND,388001,INDIA          last of what John had to say. I must admit that I could not open the link sent by Marc (despite trying several
           PHONE 0091-2692-261303      times) giving the past account on what happened to the relationship between the CSOs and CGIAR. To that
           (office)                    extent my comments below are not reflecting on the CGIAR and CSO relationship.
                     261417            Before I get into that, I would have to explain briefly where I come from into this debate. I work for a CSO and
           (Residence)                 we have two stimulating collaborations with ICRAF and IWMI (IWMI Tata program,India).Though they are still
           FAX 0091-2692--262196       in a nascent shape, they hold immense potential for contributing to rural India's development. In the past, as an
           jagdeesh@fes.org.in         organisation we moved away from a technology driven approach to base it more on rural wisdom and realities
                                       and perhaps romantically so. Later on we realised that we are likely to throw the baby with the bath water and
                                       instead of locating science and its rigour of anlaysis in its rightful role in development, we were antagonised by
                                       the apathetic views that some hold on rural wisdom and their struggle. While respecting rural wisdom (the
                                       significance of the rationale if not the content), we also began to realise the limitations in local wisdom, say for
                                       example contemporary rural knowledge on interbasin transfer of water, subsurface aquifer levels, role of soil and
                                       atmosphere interactions and influences on climate change. On the other hand we could meaningfully contribute to
                                       the scientific pursuit by bringing on board farmers' realities and perceptions. These were essentially around the
                                       draw backs of reductionistic analysis, missing out on the social dimensions around technological interventions,
                                       aspects of political economy and ecology,etc. These I guess would fall under the "service operations" that is under
                                       discussion. In the larger classification I also tend to agree that it is so, however, I would like to highlight a nuance
                                       even in such 'service operations' relationship. If the partnership between the CSO and Scientific body or Donor is




                                                                                                                                                             25
                                         not truely mutually respecting and on the path of searching for the answer ( no matter where it comes from), there
                                         is a likelihood of the relationship being reduced to donor or scientific tutelege.
                                         Coming to the discussion on the frozen relationship...Yes, there is a need for a political and institutional analysis
                                         of the relationship (John's intervention) and CSOs may decide whether to engage or not. While this answers one
                                         side of the relationship, that of the CSOs joining the relationship, it unfortunately leaves an impression that the
                                         CGIAR would remain on the course that it has decided upon and leaves no scope for feedback from the CSOs
                                         leave alone their help in contributing to determining the agenda. Am I right in assuming that the CGIAR and the
                                         Bank are also public bodies and are accountable to the civil society for their research and lending. Should the
                                         CGIAR and the World Bank also decide on whom to partner with based on such political and institutional
                                         analysis? If the leadership and governance are not strong, structurally would this not perpetuate a degree of donor
                                         or scientific tutelage? Would this be healthy for the future of science and society?
                                         Lastly, we are living in difficult times with extreme positions on the paths of development. Would it not be better
                                         to make spaces for disagreements and design appropriate governance structures to factor in the concerns, no
                                         matter how difficult it is to find consensus. I know of atleast one very difficult issue where political will,science
                                         and civil society worked together effectively at global levels- for eliminating CFCs, I am sure that there must be
                                         several such triumphs at different levels.
Martin    Director of the Department     I am Martin Price (Ph. D.). I am co-founder (25 years ago) and Director of the Department of Agricutural
Price     of Agricutural Resources for   Resources for an NGO in Florida called ECHO (Educational Concerns for Hunger Organization). I am joining a
          an NGO in Florida called       bit late because we just hosted our 13th annual conference for NGO's working in agriculture in economically
          ECHO (Educational              developing countries.
          Concerns for Hunger            ECHO exists for the sole purpose of helping other NGOs and individuals who are working to help the poor
          Organization)                  (small-holder farmers or urban gardeners). Our technical staff are all scientists and most have worked in
          mprice@echonet.org             community development. A great deal of technical information regarding tropical agriculture can be found on
          website www.echotech.org       our website (www.echotech.org). Any members who would like a free subscription to our "networking
                                         newsletter" called ECHO Development Notes please feel free to contact me.
                                         My main interest in joining this forum is that ECHO is greatly interested in helping the 2500 plus individuals and
                                         NGOs who make use of our (mostly free) services to understand just how, when and for what they can turn to the
                                         CGIAR centers. Also we want to know better how to discover the wealth of information and seeds that are within
                                         the CG centers and call the best to the attention of our network. Toward this end I have made visits to some of
                                         the centers and the annual CG meeting in Nairobi a couple years ago.
Marc J.   Research Fellow                Thanks to Jagdeesh and John for thoughtful comments on this topic.
Cohen     Food Consumption and           I think the link that I sent previously to the review of the CGIAR Partntership Committees may have been bad; try
          Nutrition Division             this one:
          International Food Policy      http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-forum/docs/partnership_committee_review.pdf.
          Research Institute             The report can also be accessed by going to our virtual conversation homepage,
          E-mail:                        http://www.dgroups.org/groups/cgiar/cso-cgiar-forum/ , and then
          m.j.cohen@cgiar.org            clicking on "resources" on the menu at the top.




                                                                                                                                                            26
A.K. Joshi   Deptt. of Genetics and Plant   To add to the ongoing nice discussion on the issue "single most important suggestion to optimize your CSO-
             Breeding                       CGIAR relationship", I wish to suggest that - the best way to optimize this relationship is to make it as much
             Institute of Agricultural      interactive as possible and this will can be best achieved through collaborative projects targeting issues that can
             Sciences                       not be handled alone by CSO's. This collaboration allows growth of a dynamic system in which all contribute in
             Banaras Hindu University       varying proportions depending upon changing requirements. In addition, this enforces all to be in regular touch to
             Varanasi 221 005, India        achieve the final target of reducing hunger or improving livelihood or .................
             Email:                         All CSO's want their countries to grow. This includes their desire to not only become self dependent but also to
             joshi_vns@yahoo.co.            become capable of helping others. CSO-CGIAR collaborative projects will ultimately help in achieving this
             in                             objective.
Loyce.       TIP AFRICA                     My single most suggestion to optimize the CSO-CGIAR relationship is that: CGIAR should continue with
             tip@tiptz.org                  collaborative research activities with CSOs since they have resources for that, and should continue to complement
                                            CSOs efforts in scaling up and out of innovations.
                                            I wanted to make a comment on Chiedozie Egesi concern about our support to smallholder farmers' subsistence
                                            agriculture. I would like to encourage Chiedozie to continue working with this group. There is saying that goes,
                                            "Rome was not built in a single day". What we have to do is to try to transform their mindset from perceiving
                                            agriculture as a subsistence activity to an income generating activity i.e agroenterprise. This can never happen in
                                            an overnight. It will definitely take time. I would like to share my experience in working with big commercial
                                            companies and smallholder farmers. In Northern Tanzania, there is a giant vegetable producing and Exporting
                                            Company. The company exports vegetable to EU countries. What we did we had a talk with the company to buy
                                            the small scale vegetable growers produces and sell them to the EU market. The company agreed but the question
                                            of quality to meet the EU standards was risen. We agreed the company would provide extension services to
                                            farmers. The price was negotiated between the parties after gross margin calculations by farmers. So, you can find
                                            out that both the big company and small scale farmers are important at this juncture. The big companies know
                                            connections and can help out smalls scale farmers when facilitated by a CSO with good reputation of course.
                                            I would like to give a testimony on collective marketing systems. Ruth please understand that when you are
                                            working with groups involved in managing the irrigation systems and marketing you cannot overload the group,
                                            no of course you complement their efforts towards achieving sustainable livelihood. At TIP our core function is to
                                            rehabilitate traditional irrigation systems in Northern Tanzania. We work with groups of small scale irrigators.
                                            After improving their irrigation systems the production went up. Then they came up with a marketing problem.
                                            Where shall we market our produces? Then we introduced marketing access and agro enterprise development
                                            component in our package of activities (Adopted the approach from CIAT). We have come to find out that those
                                            who practice collective marketing get better revenue than those who sell individually. There are some advantages
                                            in selling collectively i.e. increasing bargaining power, improving economies of scale and lowering transaction
                                            costs to mention a few. Am of the opinion that we should encourage smallholder farmers to do collective
                                            marketing as they normally produce small surplus and find it difficult to transport to the market. When they join
                                            forces, it becomes easier for them. However, concrete plans for market research should be done first. Here comes
                                            the CSO role to facilitate such activity and to make sure that the group is registered as a legal entity.




                                                                                                                                                             27
Mrs.       PhD                         I would like to react to Ruth's question: "When you are working with groups that are involved in a number of
Martine    Agroecologist               activities, do you find that having the marketing and other activities are mutually reinforcing, or does it overload
Ngobo      Communications &            groups?"
           Information officer         Sharing the STCP experience working with cocoa producers in W & C Africa, I can say that there are many
           STCP/IITA                   'models' of Farmer Groups outside there!!
           URL: www.treecrops.org      In Ghana for e.g., the biggest farmer cooperative (the Kuapa Kokoo) encompasses a social component that is
                                       separated from an entrepreneurial component dealing with marketing issues.
                                       In Cameroon, traditional farmer groups ('Common Initiative Groups' or GICs, 'Unions of GICs' or even
                                       'Federations') mostly fulfill a 'socio-political' function. With the farmers' growing need to improve the whole
                                       supply chain of their agricultural products (with the aim to improve their livelihoods), it appeared imperative that
                                       a marketing (i.e. entrepreneurial) function be added to the farmer groups. STCP/IITA is working with farmer
                                       groups in Cameroon on this issue, and over the past three years, some GICs (or Unions of GICs) have been
                                       strengthened and do now operate as 'Cooperatives' (i.e. a Farmer Group with an entrepreneurial function too).
                                       However, lots of activities had to be (and are being) conducted by the CSOs involved in the project in order to
                                       build the capacity (in terms of management, gouvernance, etc.) of those in charge of managing the entrepreneurial
                                       component of the group -- This means, farmers must focus on doing what they do best (which is PRODUCING)
                                       while other professionals (i.e. hired staff paid by the cooperative) will take care of the MARKETING (or
                                       management – including accounting) aspect.
                                       etc. etc. I am sure there are many models out there ...
                                       So Ruth, in conclusion and to answer your question: having the marketing and other activities in the same farmer
                                       group is quite feasible provided everyone [i.e. every member of the group] focuses on the area of expertise he
                                       knows best!
Sylvain    Coordinateur de la Plate-   Je vous rejoins avec beaucoup de retard. Ce qui m'oblige de vous ramener loins derrière dans les débats. Je m'en
Mapatano   forme Diobass au Kivu       excuse donc.
           219, Av. P.E. Lumumba       Gros producteurs/petits producteurs
           Ibanda/Bukavu               Focaliser sur les gros ou petits producteurs me semble effectivement dangereux. Je suis d‘avis qu‘il faut mettre
           B.P. 1914 Bukavu            l‘accent sur les cultures porteuses. L‘argument en plus est que souvent, les intérêts des gros et des petits
           Tél: 00 243 (0) 81 521 75   producteurs sont opposés. On risque donc de définir des politiques qui creusent davantage ce fossé. De notre
           72                          expérience, le travail sur les cultures porteuses ont permis à des petits producteurs de s‘organiser, non seulement
           mapatano_s@yahoo.fr         pour le marché, mais aussi comme interlocuteurs pouvant influencer les décisions politiques. De même ; en terme
                                       de souveraineté alimentaire, les petits producteurs sont condamnés si l‘effort des CG et des politiques étaient
                                       orientés vers les gros producteurs

                                       Interviews

                                       Par rapport aux interviews, j‘ai beaucoup aimé la réponse de Francisco du CGIAR sur le rôle des CSO. En réalité,
                                       beaucoup de CG n‘ont pas encore vraiment compris que les acteurs de la société civile peuvent être impliqués




                                                                                                                                                         28
dans le processus de recherche et n‘ont vraiment besoin de leur collaboration que lors de la diffusion des
technologies déjà développées. Les initiatives pour améliorer cet état de chose doivent davantage être
développées.
Luis Ampuero de Bolivie a mis l'accent sur la vision court terme des OSC. C'est vrai dans de nombreux cas, mais
pas toutes. En effet, il ya des OSC qui viennent développer des projets limités dans le temps avec les
communautés et s‘en vont après les projets, parfois, avant que les structures locales à la base ne soient à mesure
d‘assurer véritablement la pérennité des actions entreprises. D‘autres OSC sont plutôt engagés dans un réel
renforcement des dynamiques sociales capables d‘aller au délà des projets. De nombreux exemples existent en
Afrique ( ex. ENDA Tiers Monde, INADES, SAILD/Cameroun, Diobass...), sans doute ailleurs aussi.
Quant au CG, certains centres ont encore une vision unidirectionnelle et n‘ont pas une réelle vision systémique
des réalités rurales. C‘est un champ important de complémentarité avec les organisations de la société civile. Le
nouveau paradigme d‘intégration de la recherche avec tous les autres acteurs (secteur privé, paysans, acteurs
publics, ONG...) qui se met en place notamment au niveau des "Challenge Programme" en Afrique devraient être
intensifiés.
Ceci dit, la collaboration avec les CG permet une certaines rigueur dans le processus. Dans notre région par
exemple, la collaboration avec le CIAT a permis à beaucoup d‘organisation de la SC au Congo d‘améliorer leurs
outils de suivi-évaluation ou d‘analyse d‘impact des actions menées.
Le rôle des CG est également très important au délà de leurs apports scientifiques et techniques. Au plus fort des
conflits entre les pays de la région des grands lacs africains (République Démocratique du Congo, Rwanda,
Uganda) les technologies développées par le CIAT ou le CIP dans les 3 pays ont reussi à circuler malgré la
situation difficile, et les scientifiques de ces différents pays n‘ont jamais arrêté de travailler ensemble, les imputs
de la recherche sont apparus comme un trait d'union entre les communautés au délà des frontières : Les
germoplasms ont été échangés…

Quid des frustrations ?

Une des frustrations c‘est de découvrir au fur et à mesure que je m‘approche des CGIAR que de nombreuses
recherches/expériences ont été développées à travers le monde et que celles-ci ne sont assez connues par les
organisations à la base qui se posent encore de nombreuses questions.
Aussi, les recherches sur les cultures/thématiques dits principaux (ex. Haricot, manioc, banane, pomme de terre,
patate douce…) tel qu'organisé par le CGIAR est une bonne chose. Mais ces différents centres ne sont pas actifs
partout et on le comprend. Il y a donc quelque chose à faire pour faciliter aux usagers l‘accès à l‘information.
Il faut reconnaître l'apport combien louable des CG dans le développement agricole de nombreux pays pauvres.
Mais les centres nationaux de recherche se sont tournés vers les priorités des CG, « oubliant » parfois les priorités
locales. Du coup, ces centres nationaux, voire régionaux deviennent le prolongement des CG. Ceci est d‘autant
vrai dans les pays comme la RDC et d'autres pays d'Afrique qui ne peuvent disposer vraiment des moyens
suffisants pour leurs politiques de recherche.




                                                                                                                     29
A bientôt pour partager vos expériences sur ces questions !

[translation still to come]
____________________
Pour batir les relations de collaboration entre CG et OSC, c‘est important, il faut vraiment commencer au plus
bas, sur le terrain, là où le problème se pose. C‘est la nature du problème pour lequel il faut trouver une solution
qui peut même déterminer le type de relation à mettre en place. En même temps, je crois que c‘est important de
ne pas garder les relations entre individus trop longtemps, qu‘assez vite cela soit une affaire institutionnelle. La
connaissance mutuelle permet d‘établir une base de confiance nécessaire pour le travail.
Pour bien collaborer, je crois que nous devons être d‘accord sur l‘essentiel, ce qui est la base de la collaboration.
C‘est difficile de travailler par exemple avec quelqu‘un (ou une organisation) avec qui on n‘a pas la même vision.

[rough tranlation by Simone]

If we want to optimize the collaboration between the CG and the CSOs it is important to really start at the bottom,
at the lowest level, in the field where the problem is emerging. We have to understand the nature of the problem,
and find solutions to the problems. And the kind of relationships we build depends also on the problem. At the
same time I think we shouldn't maintain the relationships between individuals for too long. I think this should
become quickly an institutional issue. But to know each other well allows to establish a good basis for our work.I
think we need to agree on the major issues, on the collaboration baselines if we want to work well together. It is
for example difficult to work together if we do not share the same vision.
_______________________

Pour optimaliser la relation avec le CGIAR, je pense qu‘il faut un dialogue permanent autour des enjeux et des
défis. Ceci permet davantage d‘échanger sur nos attentes mutuelles, de développer des stratégies concertées au
regard des problèmes qui se posent à nous. Cette stratégie. Dans les zones où sont présents plusieurs CG, des
plates-formes permettant des concertations entre acteurs de la société civiles, acteurs puplics et privés sont des
voies à explorer pour développer des synergies et maximiser les résultats.

[rough tranlation by Simone]

If we want to optimize the relationship with the CGIAR, we need a permanent dialogue around the challenges
we face. By doing so we could share more about our mutual expectations, we could develop joint strategies, for
the problems we face. In the areas where several CG centers are present we could create platforms for dialogue
among actors from the civil society, the public and private sector. This idea should be explored further in order to
create synergies and maximize results.




                                                                                                                     30
Meinzen-     CAPRI            In response to last week‘s question on the respective roles and goals of CGIAR and CSOs:
Dick, Ruth   R.MEINZEN-       Some years ago the CGIAR Standing Panel on Impact Assessment (SPIA) commissioned IFPR to lead a study
             DICK@CGIAR.ORG   involving several centers on the impact of agricultural research on poverty. The case studies were to use a
                              combination of social and economic impact assessment methods, and cover a range of technologies and regions.
                               The findings have some important implications for collaboration between the CGIAR and CSOs:
                              1)     To help the poor, agricultural research and technologies must be adapted not only to the biophysical
                                   environment, but also to the livelihoods and socioeconomic conditions of poor women and men. In
                                   particular, ways must be found to overcome asset constraints and reduce the vulnerability that poor farmers
                                   may experience through trying new technologies or having to rely on markets. When we presented this, the
                                   frequent reply was that the CGIAR cannot undertake ―boutique‖ research to match the particular constraints
                                   of the poor. But I think there are important opportunities for the CGIAR to collaborate with CSOs that work
                                   extensively with the poor, who are attuned to their livelihood conditions, and who may have effective
                                   mechanisms for building assets (e.g. through savings groups).
                              2)     Dissemination pathways were a critical factor in whether the poor could benefit directly from agricultural
                                   technologies. Findings indicate that there was no one ―best‖ method of dissemination for all regions or even
                                   for all groups of farmers within one region. Generally, the studies show that NGOs had a better reputation
                                   than governments among farmers. They tended to be better at targeting the poor and women, but NGO
                                   performance was highly variable in terms of competence, integrity, and operating style. In all cases, farmers
                                   felt that when the private sector was involved in dissemination, companies were more concerned with the
                                   needs of larger, commercial, or ―successful‖ farmers and were much less interested in fulfilling the needs of
                                   poor farmers. Decision makers need to take this perception into account when considering using the private
                                   sector to develop and disseminate technologies. The use of groups was intended to make dissemination more
                                   efficient by reaching a number of farmers at once, building capacity by encouraging trained groups to train
                                   others, and empowering farmers through collective action. While local organizations sometimes achieved
                                   these objectives, in some cases, groups excluded some poor people, created conflicts over resources,
                                   mismanaged funds, or failed to reach farmers outside the group. Women‘s groups offer advantages to women
                                   who might not otherwise have the opportunity to engage in collective activities. Group-based methods, like
                                   other development efforts involving community participation, can give huge payoffs that make them worth
                                   pursuing. When they work, they are extremely rewarding both for the participants and the disseminating
                                   institutions. But there are no shortcuts.
                              The CGIAR is not necessarily directly involved in dissemination of technologies, but the results indicate that
                              careful thought should be given to how technologies are disseminated, and to fostering the appropriate
                              partnerships. Based on our cases, it seems that partnerships with NGOs and a range of farmer groups (especially
                              groups of women farmers) may be important for really reaching the poor.
                              The findings are compiled in a forthcoming book:
                               Michelle Adato and Ruth Meinzen-Dick (eds.). Agricultural Research, Livelihoods, and Poverty: Studies of
                               Economic and Social Impacts in Six Countries. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press and




                                                                                                                                              31
                                        International Food Policy Research Institute.
                                        However, all of the case studies and several synthesis documents are available at
                                        http://www.ifpri.org/themes/iarp/iarppubs.asp#syn
                                        It seems that many of the CSOs reporting on partnership with the CGIAR have been involved in technology
                                        development and dissemination—it is interesting to hear their perspective on whether they find this to be a useful
                                        collaboration.
Tom         CRS                         Nadia -
Remington   tremington@crsearo.org      Well put and relevant - partnership with CSOs is often an add-on and not considered in a researcher's
                                        performance evaluation. The result is that researcher partners - though well intended - no not allocate the time
                                        required by the partnership.
                                        I suggest that if we looked at successful partnerships we would find that the researcher did prioritize this work
                                        and did invest. The question is was this a personal decision or was there management support? I refer to 'icing
                                        on the cake' partnerships as 'paper partnerships.
jonas       Oped, Cameroon,             Dans la consolidation des relations CG et OSC, Sylvain a vu juste lorsqu'il dit ''qu'il faut commencer au plus bas,
kemajou     jksyapze@yahoo.com          sur le terrain, là où le problème se pose''. Je suis d'avis et j'ajouterais que les initiatives conjointes CG et OSC,
syapze                                  lorsqu'elles tirent leurs fondements des réalités quotidiennes, les chances d'apporter des solutions ''simples et
                                        efficaces'' sont importantes. Avoir des bases institutionnelles solides entre le CG et les OSC nous semble être le
                                        chemin de la consolidation des nos acquis mutuels.

                                        [rough translation by Simone]

                                        The process of fostering CSO-CGIAR relationships needs indeed as Sylvain stated to "start at the lowest level, on
                                        the field, where the problem emerges." I would like to add that joint CSO-CGIAR initiatives, when they are based
                                        on the reality of day-to-day life, need to look at the possibility of offering "simple and efficient" solutions.
                                        We need solid institutional bases between CSOs and the CGIAR to consolidate our mutual achievements.
Santiago    PBA, Colombia               Quisiera referirme al tema de los public-private partnerships, en relación con las alianzas entre productores
Perry       sperry@corporacionpba.org   grandes (y procesadores) con pequeños productores. En varios países andinos estas alianzas se han desprestigiado
                                        porque los productores grandes/procesadores acaban imponiendo sus condiciones e intereses, y los pequeños no
                                        ven los beneficios que inicialmente les habían prometido. En Colombia, específicamente, hay casos de estos, pero
                                        también hay casos en que se ha logrado que pequeños agricultores organizados, con el apoyo gubernamental,
                                        obtengan una relación equitativa y rentable en estas alianzas, y puedan mejorar su tecnología, su producción y sus
                                        ingresos. Creo que para que esto último se logre es importante contar con reglas del juego claras, poner
                                        claramente sobre la mesa las funciones e intereses de cada uno de los actores en la alianza, y que el sector público
                                        busque velar porque esas reglas y esos intereses (en especial los de los pequeños) se tengan en cuenta en cada
                                        decisión y se respeten. Es decir, que el sector público ―sirva de árbitro‖ y ayude a fortalecer el poder de
                                        negociación de los pequeños para ―equilibrar‖ la alianza.




                                                                                                                                                            32
                                Respecto a la relación CSO-CGIAR creo que hay algo parecido: desde el principio deben establecerse reglas
                                claras y velar porque se respeten: establecer claramente el rol de cada uno en las alianzas de trabajo que se hagan,
                                dejar en claro los intereses y visiones de cada uno, y trabajar en equipo pero cada uno cumpliendo la función (o
                                rol) que tiene establecido.

                                [rough translation by Simone]

                                I would like to reinforce the topic of public-private partnerships in relation to the alliances between big producers
                                (and processors). In several Andean countries those alliances have lost prestige, because the big producers and
                                processors impose their conditions and interests, and the small farmers do not get the benefits that they have been
                                guaranteed. Specifically in Colombia we had many of those cases, but we also encounter situations where small
                                farmers who were organized and got support from the government achieve a balanced and profitable relationship
                                within those alliances, and could improve their technologies, production arte, and income. In order to achieve
                                that, I think we need to have very clear rules of the game, in terms of roles and interests of each actor, and that the
                                public sector is having some kind of control to assure that the interests of the small farmers are taken into account
                                and respected. This means that the public sector should arbitrate and support the strengthening the negotiation
                                power and skills of the small farmers to balance the alliance. I think something similar is happening in the
                                relationship between CSOs and the CGIAR: we need clear rules right from the start, and we need to be sure that
                                those rules are maintained: Define very clearly who is doing what in joint projects, highlight the interests and
                                visions of each actor, and work in a team to fulfill each others function or role as they have been defined.
Mike      (CIMMYT)              Nadia and Tom:
Listman   M.LISTMAN@cgiar.org   Thanks for these comments. I don't believe you'd find many researchers at CIMMYT who feel that their
                                relationships with CSOs or others in the broad spectrum of partners with whom they work are "add-ons." While
                                they strive for scientific excellence, there is strong tradition here since
                                the days of Norm Borlaug to ensure that results get applied in farmers' fields. With only some 90 internationally
                                recruited scientists to implement global programs on two major food crops---maize and wheat---I'd say it's pretty
                                clear to everyone that the only way they can have an impact is through effective partnerships with capable and
                                motivated people. I'm sure that researchers at the other CG centers work under similar circumstances. Definitely
                                it's a challenge to combine
                                research with follow-through to foster application, but both appear to be necessary aspects of what CG centers do,
                                and close relationships with/input from partners ensures that research stays relevant.
                                I sincerely hope that whatever comes out of these discussions, the innovation marketplace, and other CSO-CG
                                interactions as part of AGM 2006 truly serves to enable and empower the above
                                partnerships/relationships, and is not simply a move to systematize them in the interest of a stronger centralized
                                identity for the CG.




                                                                                                                                                     33
AYISSI   Sécretaire Exécutif de   Nous venons aujourd'hui partager notre expérience sur la domestication du gnetum africanum spp communément
NNANGA   l'ADIE                   appelé "okok"ou "eru".
Pierre   B.P. 26 EVODOULA         Le gnetum africanum spp est une liane grimpante qui pousse dans les forêts humides du Sud, Centre, Est et Sud-
         CAMEROUN                 Ouest et dont les feuilles vertes sont très prisées pour leur valeur nutritive.
         E.MAIL                   depuis des siècles, les peuples des forêts pratiquent sans cesse la cueillette de ses feuilles, sans pouvoir en
         adie1997@yahoo.fr        replanter. Si on ajoute à cela son exploitation massive au-delà de nos frontières, on comprend aisément pour quoi
         TEL:(237) 7779228.       aujourd'hui les paysans sont obligés d'aller de plus en plus loin dans la forêt pour cueillir ses feuilles.
                                  L'okok est un aliment très riche. Il contient les 8 aminoacides essentiels et beaucoup d'éléments minéraux dont le
                                  potassium, le phosphore, le calcium, le magnesium,le sodium,le chlore.Ilest riche en lipides, carbohydrates,
                                  cellulose, fibres végétales.
                                  L'okok est non seulement utilisé comme aliment diététique, mais également en médecine pour soigner la nausée.
                                  C‘est un antidote pour le poison. les tiges peuvent aussi servir comme tisane pour allèger les accouchements
                                  difficiles.
                                  Sur le plan écologique, la domestication de cette liane permet de sauvegarder l'environnement forestier surtout
                                  dans les zones de surexploitation de ses feuilles.
                                  Dans le Département de la Lékié, les forêts sont devenues rares, la "kondégui"ou (chlomoleana odoratum), une
                                  plante adventiste originaire d'Amérique Centrale que l'on retrouve aujourd'hui dans une bonne partie de l'Afrique
                                  Occidentale et Centrale fait que les forêts réculent à cause de l'agriculture intensive qui permet son
                                  envahissement.
                                  Depuis une décennie, l'ADIE,le CIFOR,la Comune d'Evodoula, les Groupes des femmes d'Evodoula de manière
                                  participative ont élaboré un projet en vue de restaurer les forêts dégradées et d'établir l'adéquation besoins de
                                  l'environnement - besoins économiques.
                                  C‘est ainsi que 60 champs et 60 parcelles d'okok sont aujourd'hui en préservation.
                                  Dans cette partenariat d'exécution du projet, l'ADIE apporte les conseils sur les techniques de culture des
                                  sauvageons en association avec les boutures de manioc.
                                  l'ADIE organise les séances de sensibilisation sur les vertus de la ressource.
                                  l'ADIE organise, formalise, structure les organisations paysannes à ce doter des structures formelles dans la filière
                                  d'okok.
                                  l'ADIE suit de manière permanente les activités de production, de collecte, et de vente.
                                  l'ADIE met en confrontation les producteurs et les commerçants en vue d'obtenir les meilleures conditions de
                                  vente et d'achat. Tener;le paquet de 500g des feuilles d'okok coûtait 150FCFA il ya 3 ans chez les collecteurs à la
                                  base, aujourd'hui il coûte 650FCFA.
                                  Le CIFOR forme les agents et les cadres de l'ADIE ainsi que les communautés sur l'importance socioéconomique,
                                  écologique et culturelle de la ressource.
                                  Le CIFOR aide les femmes à domestiquer l'okok dans les parcelles agroforestiéres qui bordent leur village en leur
                                  apportant un appui sur le petit équipement et matériel.
                                  Le CIFOR appui l'ADIE en lui apportant un moyen de déplacement pour le suivi des activités sur le terrain




                                                                                                                                                     34
(moto).
Le CIFOR et l'ADIE permettent aux populations de mieux comprendre les mécanisme de formation des prix dans
le marché de l'okok.
Le CIFOR invite les médias afin d'influencer les décideurs en faveur de l'élaboration des politiques forestières
durables.
Dans ce projet , la Commune d'evodoula a octroyé un local pour usage de bureau à l'ADIE.
La Commune des aides aux groupes des femmes. Elle donne la salle de conférence lors des réunions et les
formations.
Les groupes des femmes cèdent les parcelles de terrain pour la domestication pendant une période de 20 ans. Ils
sont les premiers bénéficiaires du projet et mettent leur main d‘œuvre pour le succès du projet.
Les partenariats ADIE-CIFOR, ADIE-ORGANISATIONS LOCALES, ADIE-COMMUNE dans ce projet
bonifient les conditions économiques des familles pauvres des zones rurales, mais encore améliorent l'état de
leurs forêts.
Cela montre bien que nous n'avons pas ànous laisser gagner par le pessimisme qui semble planer sur l'avenir des
forêts tropicales de la planète. Il existe une foule des actions pratiques même locales permettant aux pauvres
d'améliorer leurs moyens de subsistance tout en sauvegardant les forêts. "Tout ce qui compte c'est une motivation
à l'echelle locale qui va renforcer les OSCs avec le CGIAR.

[rough translation by Simone]

Today we would like to further extend our experience of the domestication of gnetum africanum spp currently
called "okok" or "eru".
Gnetum africanum spp is a climbing creeper, which grows in the humid forests of teh South, center, East, and
Southeast. Its green leafs are in high demand because of their nutritive value. For ages now, the people who live
in the forests are harvesting those leafs without being able to replant them. Exploitation is massive beyond our
frontiers and farmers need to go deeper and deeper into the forests to get those leafs.
Okok is a very rich plant with (8 amino acids, minerals, potassium phosphor, calcium, magnesium, sodium,
lipids, carbohydrates, vegetal fibers… It is good for diets, but also as a drug when you feel nauseous, or as an
antidote against poison. It can be used in form of herbal teas to calm suffering during birth.
From an ecological point of you, the domesticating this plant would help to maintain the forests that are in danger
because of intensive agricultural practices.
AFIE, CIFOR, the Evodoula community and women‘s group joint efforts more than 10 years ago. In a
participatory manner we developed a project that aims to limit forests degradation and to find the right balance
between economic and ecological needs.
Currently we are preserving and working on 60 plots.
ADIE contributes with the following
      Advice on how to cultivate the plant together with cassava.




                                                                                                                  35
        Sessions to raise awareness of the benefits of this plant.
        Support to farmers to get organized.
        Monitoring of production, harvest, and selling cycles.
        Facilitating negotiations between producers and sellers. Farmers sell today 500 g for 650FCFA instead
         of 150 FCFA three years ago.
 CIFOR:
      Trains ADIE and community leaders
      Support to the women‘s group in cultivating the plant, contribution of equipment.
      Facilitates transportation. ADIE has now a motorcycle.
      CIFOR and ADIE help the communities to understand market chain mechanisms and how prices are
         established.
      CIFOR gets media involved to influence decision makers in favor of sustainable forest policies.
      For this project the Evodoula community offers a office space to ADIE and helps the women‘s group
         with meeting and training facilities.
      The women‘s group makes the plots available for a 20-year period. They are the first beneficiaries and
         work hard for the success of this project.
 This multiple partnership ADIE-CIFOR, ADIE-Local ORGANISATIONS, ADIE-COMMUNITY improves the
economic conditions of the poor, and also the ecological conditions of their forests
 This shows that we don‘t need to be pessimistic on the future of the forests of our planet. Their are so many
possible practical actions at the local level that allow the poor to improve their livelihoods, and simultaneously to
protect our forests. What really counts is the motivation at the local level, and this will reinforce the CSO-CGIAR
relationship.




                                                                                                                   36