ROOTS TUBERS & BANANAS
-
Upload
international-institute-of-tropical-agriculture -
Category
Government & Nonprofit
-
view
31 -
download
0
Transcript of ROOTS TUBERS & BANANAS
RTB Update
IITA Ibadan
27 January 2016
Six reasons why RTB is best CRP!
1. Only CRP to receive “excellent” in Annual Reporting to CO in 2014 and 2015!
2. Commendation by CO for reporting on gender and used our format as model for other CRPs
3. CRP with highest number of A grades in ISPC review of pre-proposals
4. Outstanding external review (best of all six read so far by Yvonne Pinto of ISC)
5. Based on performance review DFID granted RTB 3.5 million pounds of W2 funding
6. Just agreed BMGF funding for RTB led project on cassava seed systems for $11.6m
1. Governance & Management
Center & Gender Focal Points
RTB 1.0 to RTB 2.0
RTB 1.0
RTB 2.05 Flagships and 25 clusters
Outcome Orientation (RBM)
Multidisciplinary teams from different Themes
Online software platform
Google drive
Research / output
orientation
7 RTB Themes
• Gender research coordinator, full time - Bhawana• Communications officer – Holly• M&E Officer - Claudio• Science officer – Michael:
– Product delivery plans – Formulation and review of progress discovery/breeding related
products, milestones and activities. – Strategic advice to Program Director on range of science issues
PMU staffing update
2. Adding value synergistic research: breeding
• Sequencing and phenotyping data • Support genomic analyses (GWAS, GS)
for complex traits (eg. potato tuberization and early bulking, fertility and fruit quality in banana)
• Common Vision RTB data management and bio-informatics• Promote linkages CassavaBase,
SweetpotatoBase, MusaBase etc with Integrated Breeding Platform and multiple crop/center tools
August 2015, Bioversity Montpellier
January 2015, Ithaca
2. Adding value synergistic research: breeding
Integrating End User Preferences in RTB Breeding – Workshop Kampala (Feb 2015)
Critical gaps: working across disciplines to fill gaps in knowledge and technical support to bring greater “end-user awareness” to public sector
• Biological and socio-economic surveys pests and diseases along altitudinal gradients
• Modelling to understand degeneration of planting material and design cost effective interventions
• Improvement of energy efficiency in cassava processing & adding value to RTB waste products
2. Adding value: seed, pests and diseases and post harvest
• Collaboration with ILRI and CRP Livestock & Fish and CRP Humidtropics
3. Communications● RTB communication channels in 2015
• Blogs and News – RTB research, publications, successes– Partners contribute and share
• Flyers – RTB second phase
84% increase in Facebook
followers from 2014
43% increase in Twitter followers
from 2014
1000+ Newsletter subscribers
25,000+ visitors to RTB website so far this year. Up from
14,000 in 2014
4. BMGF: Cassava seed Value Chain & project components
Breeder Seed
Foundation seed
Commercial seed growers
Farmers / Seed Users
Seed Quality & Protocols
Seed & Information
Consumer Demand & Money
M&E
4. BMGF: Cassava seed Value Chain next steps
• Project planning meeting this week!• Interview for project coordinator• Project start up and M&E workshop: 18-19th April
Global integrating programs
5. Pre-proposals Second Phase
Dryland Cereals and Legumes systems
GenebankS
++
Fish agri-food systems
Forest and Agroforestry systems
Livestock agri-food systems
Maize agrifood systems
Rice agri-food systems
Roots, tubers and bananas systems
Wheat agri-food systems
NUTRITION
&
HEALTH
PI
M
WLE
CLI
MATE
CHANGE
Gender
Capacity Development
Big data/ ICT
Genetic Resources Policy
Expressions of Interest
(10)
Agri-food systems programs
Genetic gain
Genebanks
FP1: Discovery
FP2: Varieties/
seed
FP3: resilient
crops
FP4: nutritious/
added value
FP5: Livelihood
systems
FP6: Impact @ scale
Clair Inge James Graham Piet (Philippe)
Dietmar
GlobalChallenges
Oscar
Partnership& CapDev
Simone
Gender Netsayi & Bhawana
ToC/IDO Claudio
5. Pre-proposal and ISPC review
Intense internal review: CIP BoT, ISC and MC!
Builds on business cases for clusters and flagships
Program structure & ISPC rating
A A A A
C
C
5. Pre-proposal ISPC: feedback
5. Pre-proposal ISPC: feedback
Satisfactory with adjustment, recommends inviting full proposal
• Clear comparative advantage
• Well conceptualised, strong and stable management
• Pre-proposal generally very high standard • Role of other CRPs and partners explained succinctly
with great clarity• Theory of change and impact pathway for RTB clear,
focused, logical and plausible• Greatest concern FP5 (livelihood systems) and FP6
(impact at scale)
6. IEA review of RTB: headlines
5 person team led by Jill Lenne – extensive visits• Notable progress in past 4 years• Strongly warrants continuing• Well directed, achieving reasonable # of milestones• Adding value across crops and centers mainly through
complementary funded projects• Science sound• NARs appreciative• Good progress gender strategy• Good program governance and management
IEA review of RTB: for improvement
• using outcomes of priority assessment for more strategic allocation of budget across crops
• collaboration among breeders (cassava and banana)• strengthening CRP expertise in seed systems• improved integration of crop improvement and
management technologies• enhanced focus of post-harvest research on the
crop-specific aspects of value chain improvements
7. Full proposal: Rome meeting
• Budget down to $900m from $1400 submission• Reduced from 69 to 58 Flagships
• 3 D rated flagships eliminated • 16 C rated flagships consolidated
• Need more clarity Window 1 and Window 2 funds• Should be seen as leading the research and less as propping up
the system
• Management and supervision costs more efficient and comparable
• range from approx. $1m to $4.5m
RTB: best and now the biggest!
CRP
2017 Projected W1 + W2
US$ millions
2017 % of $207
million W1+W2
2017 ProjectedBilateral
& W3 US$
millions
2017% of
Bilateral & W3
2017 Projected
Total under $900m
indicative budget
US$ millions
% of Total$900
millionbase
budget
AFSCRPs
DCLAS 11.4 5.5 93.7 13.6 105.1 11.7Fish 8.5 4.1 17.6 2.5 26.1 2.9FTA 10.7 5.2 62.6 9.1 73.3 8.2Livestock 20.2 9.8 23.1 3.3 43.3 4.8Maize 12.6 6.1 55.1 8.0 67.7 7.5Rice 14.4 6.9 71.9 10.4 86.3 9.6RTB 22.3 10.7 91.9 13.3 114.2 12.7Wheat 14.7 7.1 28.5 4.1 43.2 4.8
GICRPs
A4NH 19.8 9.6 71.2 10.3 91.0 10.1CCAFS 20.9 10.1 36.0 5.2 56.9 6.3PIM 18.8 9.1 74.0 10.7 92.8 10.3WLE 9.4 4.5 49.3 7.1 58.7 6.5
Platforms
Genebanks 21.5 10.4 8.5 1.2 30.0 3.3Gen. Gain 2.0 1.0 8.0 1.2 10.0 1.1
TOTAL 207.2 100.0 691.3 100.0 898.5 100.0
Merge FP5 and FP6: rationale
• Common conceptual framework: innovation system perspective
• Multi-indicator, actors and scales and help design, test and target innovations
• Both strong gender content, linkages with FP1-4 and emphasis on enhancing impact
• Space for agronomists, nutritionists, sociologists and economists across centers to think and engage
Changes in restrategized FP5
• Place based clusters dropped• Systems dimension linked to site integration
– Vietnam ++ country: cassava with conservation ag. with and scaling via linkages processors
• More opportunistic – what do we have already?• Improved focus IPGs in cross cutting work• Stronger reciprocal linkages FP1-FP4• Linkages “livelihood/impact at scale” FPs in other
AFS CRPs
RTB New Program Structure
8. Full proposal: next steps
• Set up core writing team and extended team– Writing process underway– Cluster descriptions due Jan 20th
• Key period Feb 1-23rd • First draft due Feb 29th
• Submission March 31st
9. Wrap up
1. Dynamic Independent Steering Committee:
2. Planning shift RTB 1.0 to 2.0
3. Strengthened scientific collaboration: “RTB team”
4. Enhanced gender research
5. Dynamized RTB communication channels
6. Strong Pre-Proposal – well set to move forward
7. Outstanding external review
8. Working on full proposal NOW!