Presented by Zelalem Lema, Beth Cullen, Aberra Adie, Gerba Leta and Elias Damtew at the Africa RISING Training Workshop on Innovation Platforms, Addis Ababa, 23-24 January 2014

1. Local innovation platforms:
Experiences from the Nile BDC in
Ethiopia
Zelalem Lema, Beth Cullen, Aberra Adie, Gerba Leta, Elias Damtew
Africa RISING Training Workshop on Innovation Platforms
Addis Ababa, 23-24 January 2014

2. Overview of NBDC project...
Nile Basin Development Challenge (NBDC) was funded by a
CGIAR challenge program on water and food (CPWF)
NBDC was implemented by a consortium led by ILRI and IWMI
NBDC aims to improve the resilience of rural livelihoods in the
Ethiopian highlands through a landscape approach to rainwater
management
The challenge comprises five linked projects of which this project
focused on Integrating policy, institution and technologies
around rainwater management

3. IP Processes /steps in NBDC
Situational
Analysis
Issues (planning and
implementation of NRM)
Stakeholders
Establish
IPs
IP concept
Stakeholders
ToR
Meetings
Identify issues
Share
experiences
Learning
Capacity
buildings
Action
research
Trainings
Innovation
Fund & Action
Research
Experience
sharing
events
Pilot
intervention
Scaling up/out
(Field das)

4. Situational Analysis
Research was conducted around how NRM planning and
implementation carried out in the three sites.
Historically NRM interventions in Ethiopia have been topdown leading to limited sustainability of interventions.
NBDC sites are three (Jeldu and Diga woredas in Oromia
and Fogera in Amhara region)
Base-line research conducted in the three NBDC sites at
the start of the project identified the following issues:
•Isolated technical interventions
•Lack of cross-sector collaboration and coordination
•Weaknesses in technical design
•Poor follow up and monitoring
•Lack of relevance to local priorities
•Lack of voluntary collective action

5. Development of a working hypothesis...
Development of integrated strategies by a range of
stakeholders which consider technologies, policies and
institutions will demonstrate an alternative approach to
top-down implementation and lead to improved NRM.
But how do we achieve this?

6. Or...

7. Definition Innovation Platforms (IPs)
•
An IP is a space for learning and change. It is a
group of individuals (who often represent
organizations) with different backgrounds and
interests: farmers, traders, food processors,
researchers, government officials, NGO experts, etc.
•
The members come together to diagnose problems,
identify opportunities and find ways to achieve their
goals. They may design and implement activities as
a platform, or coordinate activities by individual
members.
http://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/33667/browse
?value=Policy+Brief&type=output

8. IP establishment in NBDC
• NBDC set up IPs at Woreda level in 2011 (jeldu, Diga
and Fogera)
• There was a national platform on Land and Water
Management and regional stakeholder workshops
• IPs in NBDC was established in all the three site based
on the evidences we get from the situation analysis
• Stakeholder analysis was made and key actors have
been identified (farmers, research centers,
universities, NGOs, different government sector
experts and decision makers, etc)
• The first meeting was held at the woreda level- this
was driven by ILRI researchers to play the
establishment and facilitation role during the first year
• IP Experiences from RiPPLE and ILRI-Fodder projects
were shared – what is IP? how it function?

9. IP establishment in NBDC…
- We presented a sample format of Term of Reference (ToR) :joint development of the ToR around:
- What can be the simple local name for the IP? Who should
better chair locally? Who is a secretary/Facilitator? Who should
be members for the Technical Group? Who should be
additional key stakeholders for the IP? How frequent should all
members meet? What will be the role of the members? Who
should document the minutes?
- Most of the time ToR is easy to develop and share for all but
hard to follow– local context affects
-
It would be the facilitator who should play a key role in making
the ToR effective

10. IP establishment in NBDC…
- Generally IP members in NBDC agreed on the following in their ToR
- They give their local name to their IP (Afan Oromo and Amharic)
- They agreed to meet 4 times per year (every quarter)
- They select 5 -7 members for the Technical Group (TG) members
and agreed on their role (training, develop concept note, activity
plan, report, facilitate field days, experience sharing etc)
- The case of Jeldu woreda for example the TG members include
Ambo University, Holeta ARC, Jeldu Woreda Livestock Agency and
NR department, HUNDEE local NGO)
- Assign Focal person representing the selected institution as an IP
member

11. Fogera IP members

12. NBDC IP members (Fogera woreda)
External
members
Woreda level
members
• ILRI and IWMI
• Bahir Dar University (college of
agriculture and environmental
science)(TG)
• Adet Agricultural and Andassa
Livestock Research Centres) (TG)
• Office of Agriculture (Head and vice for
Woreda Admin)
• NRM expert (TG)
• Extension expert
• Livestock expert (TG)
• Office of water, mine and energy
• Women, youth and children affair office
• Cooperative office
• Office of Finance and Economic
Development
• Environmental Protection and land
administration and use
• Ethio-wetland Fogera Office (local NGO)
(TG and local facilitator)
• Farmers from the NBDC 4 watershed
kebeles (8) (a farmer & K. Chairman)
• Development Agents from 4 kebeles
Community
level members:

13. Regular IP meetings & Community Engagement
Activities
- Every quarter IP members meet to
discuss, learn and share
- In 2011 – on the first year of the NBDC- it
focuses on identification of issues around
NRM specific to their local context
- The process of issue identification and
prioritization took a lot of time in NBDC
- IP level issue was identified around NRM
- Community level issue identification was
made (PV and FGD to engage
community)
- Re-considering the issues identified at IP
and community level and come up with
specific issues identified for each site

14. NBDC site specific issues
Site
Main Issue
Related Issues
Fogera
Unrestricted
grazing
Land
degradation
Diga
Land
degradation
Termite
infestation *
Jeldu
Soil erosion
Deforestation
Fodder interventions have been selected by
stakeholders in all three sites to address these
issues
* Interventions in Diga linked to CPWF Termite Action Research
Project

15. Innovation
Fund
• Small fund (80,000-120, 000 ETB) was
allocated to the platform to fund action
research activities on fodder
• Proposals and action plans were developed
by TG members according to defined criteria
by IP members
• Actions should be cross-sectoral,
participatory, designed to address RWM
specific issues selected and targeted to
suitable area
• A site villages were selected within the
designated NBDC watershed
• Fodder interventions chosen as an entry
point to address the specific issues selected
• Action to take place at household level,
farmland and communal land

16. Backstopping activities
ILRI
TG members
Framers
• Trainings for TG
members
• Devolving roles to
local partners
• Community
engagement
exercises
• IP meetings
• Trainings for
farmers at
different level
• Input supplies
• Community
engagement
exercises
• Field days
• IP meetings
• Farmers
knowledge and
skill
• Allocating land
• Planting,
managing,
utilizing fodder
species

17. Outcomes of Fodder Interventions for
two years (2012 and 2013)
200 Households have been directly involved
in the IP pilot intervention
5 km length of soil and water conservation
structures have been covered by fodder
trees and grasses (Jeldu)
Intervention include individual farm land,
communal grazing land, soil and water
conservation structures, back yards, hillside
and degraded lands
Field days have been conducted before
harvesting in each of the sites for the two
seasons

18. Outcomes….
Some of the Farmers in Jeldu and Diga
have started selling Desho seedlings
and Rohdess seeds and start generating
income from 500-15,000 ETB
In Fogera farmers able to harvest
grasses from restricted grazing
communal land and able to feed during
dry season
Experience sharing visit has been
organized for Fogera farmers and IP
members to Andassa LRC and model
sites

19. Outcomes….
•
Farmers start requesting improved breeds to
increase their livestock productivity
•
Wollega University have been engaged actively
in providing Rohdes seedlings to the IP farmers
with little cost and also promised to supply
improved breeds
•
Holeta ARC also supplied elephant grass
seedlings for free to IP farmers in Jeldu
•
HUNDEE and Ethio-wetland supported the
farmers by transporting the seedlings to the
farmers field level
•
A lot of networks and collaboration have been
occurred beyond our documentation on each
•
Local government in Jeldu and Diga take the
pilot intervention as a successful one and
scaling out it
•
Zone level recognition for Diga because of the
IP intervention around NRM

20. IP Fodder interventions to complement SLM campaign

21. Challenges so far...
• Facilitation of IP’s is time and resource consuming
•
Good facilitation is essential with required skills
•
Facilitation occurring from a distance
•
Platforms have been driven by NBDC agenda
•
Problems with incentives (issues over per diems etc.)
• Platform participants inconsistent attendance at meetings
•
Stakeholders often play dual roles which can affect the process
•
How to incorporate existing knowledge and experience (e.g. RIPPLE, IPMS,
African Highlands Initiative etc.)
•
Design of M&E processes which do not rely on researchers (participatory
video to perhaps play a role in this)
• Lack of adequate funds and high expectations!
•
Lack of trust between farmers and IP members in some sites

22. Lessons
Incentives for IP members are important to actively participate in the IP
process
Consistent participation of IP member in all the regular learning
meetings and IP Processes is important to build knowledge among
local actors
Lack of community level IPs in NBDC created gap and takes long
processes to engage farmers in identification of issues
Lack of local level site coordinators created gap on close follow up and
facilitation of the IP processes and documentation
Low capacity of local actors, staff turn over, government re-structuring,
trust