1

AgCommons Criteria CSI Annual meeting

Needs for the CfP

Proposal instructions should not be restrictive Should be clear on parameter boundaries (size; duration; theme:

fish, livestock included?) Should be clear on overall programme direction, targeted

community, architecture so that project fit can be demonstrated against these.

What is the big programme puzzle, and what will constitute a decent of part of it.

General

Feasibility Clear and concrete definition of the problem or the opportunity

targeted with translation into deliverables Gender sensitivity Projects should have their own M&E, and produce results that

feed properly into overall programme M&E Clear definition of target stakeholders, and their information

needs

Specific

Must have “provable” expected impact on the farmer, directly or indirectly

Strong social science inclusion on technology adoption, especially for (project extension) proposals where local stakeholders have not been reached yet; Potential for social adoption

Spatial enablement/empowerment makes a sensible, useful and compelling case

Portfolio of project should display a wide spectrum: o Geographic scales o Temporal scales o Risk levels

2

o Innovation levels o Range of stakeholders with different infrastructure

Emphasis on the farmer group, not yet on the farmer. Crop-centric proposals only if spill over of results is expected to

other crops Demonstrate scalability and reproducability Sustainability

o Economically (beyond budget period) o Societally embeddable o Environmental

This needs to be prioritized.