Twelve Propositions for Discussion

1

Julian F. Gonsalves PhD.

1. The new reformed CGIAR set up, especially the CRP arrangements, is fostering inter-center collaboration, cooperation and consequently transdisciplinary research.

2

2. Challenges posed by the current AR4D focus on poverty, food security, environment and particularly climate change are complex, multi-scale, involving a diversity of stakeholders (with different perspectives and sometimes competing interests) have resulted in a new demand for support in social learning-related areas.

3

3. Methodological innovations and new work modalities are needed to address the disciplinary boundaries and biases which still characterize some of the work of some CG centers.

4

4. New modalities must recognize the value of bringing stakeholders across the RD spectrum with special emphasis on strategic and purposive integration of the Regional and National research sectors. Otherwise, it could be “business as usual”.

5

5. Resulting from the CRP orientation, emerging partnerships, new work arrangements, ICT tools and related increased networking provide new opportunities for demonstrating the value and eventually institutionalizing social learning approaches, provided this is done in an organized, coordinated, reflective and consultative manner.

6

6. There is an “all time high” awareness of the limited uptake of research products and processes – the gap between R & D, resulting in the wider promotion of partnership-based platforms directed primarily at demonstrating the relevance of an innovations perspective and aimed at enhancing research uptake/use.

7

7. The social and institutional issues associated with climate change research in the AR4D sector have many similarities with past CG efforts in natural resources management research.

8

8. There is wider acceptance and bigger emphasis of the scientific community on the importance and legitimacy of doing research on issues related to upscaling and outscaling. Learning and participatory communication come “into play” in a bigger way.

9

9. CCAFs has well demonstrated models to build on in its adaptive management work.

9.1 Models for effective community engagement -of relevance to any adaptation work- of relevance to any subsequent upscaling efforts are best developed through effective researcher engagement at the local level. The value of FFS, CIALs and ACM/Co-Management as relevant approaches for researchers to engage local communities has been proven.

10

11

9.2 Efforts to address institutional issues associated with climate change can draw heavily from a rich and long tradition of research on collective action (www.capri.cgiar.org).

9.3 Models for outscaling at the higher level have also been demonstrated through such approaches as Learning Alliances and other multistakeholder platforms.

10. A community of practice on areas related to social learning can be considered. The compilation for wider sharing and promotion of the diverse range of field tested tools and approaches – currently widely dispersed and remaining unknown to the wider community – would be a logical early step.

12

11. Social learning in AR4D out of necessity implies frequent, equal exposure and substantive interaction to lower level stakeholders (e.g. communities, farmer groups). Otherwise it will be business as usual.

13

12. Social learning efforts are knowledge and time intensive – involving cycles of learning and reflection – and cannot be rushed. Social learning efforts are likely to generate “real” results at the local level only if adequate investment of time and effort in community level engagement is undertaken before upscaling is attempted.

14