Presentation by Laurianne Ollivier and Judith A. Francis (CTA) at the 2016 annual meeting of the European Forum on Agricultural Research for Development (EFARD).

1. PAEPARD Users’ Led Process
Assessing European stakeholders Engagement & Role
and derive lessons
On Agriculture Research for
Development EFARD
Laurianne Ollivier
Judith Francis
CTA
12/06/2016

2. PAEPARD Users’ Led Process
from supply-driven approach towards a demand-driven approach in ARD
What can we learn from the ULP
approach ?
EAFF: Extensive Livestock value chain in Eastern Africa with Specific
focus on Kenya & Uganda
PROPAC: Urban horticulture value chain inclusive of gardening
crops in urban areas with specific focus in Congo Brazzaville, DRC &
Cameroon
ROPPA: Rice value chain in Benin, Burkina Faso & Mali
FARNPAN: Groundnut value chain in Zambia & Malawi
COLEACP: Adding value to mango non-food uses in West Africa
with specific focus on Burkina-Faso, Côte d’Ivoire
New brokerage mechanism

3. üPromote research based on users’ needs and
challenges
ü Improve existing multi-stakeholder partnerships
üReinforce existing dynamics at national and
regional level
ULP Objectives

4. Assessing European stakeholders Engagement & Role and
derive lessons
• Evolution and achievement of ULPs process- (engagement of European
stakeholders)
• Motivations and key constraints to commitment and collaboration
• Role of different stakeholders in term of knowledge creation and
knowledge sharing
• Learning process between European /African as well as research/ non
research stakeholders
Objectives of EFARD study

5. • Literature review
• Interview key actors
ü Questionnaire :ULP coordinators (5), ULP partner (~70), including ULP
core group members and AIFs
ü Questionnaire to NON ULP stakeholders (PAEPARD consortium -25
stakeholders)
ü Questionnaire to PAEPARD community (D-Group)
• Analyses, Reporting & Advocacy:
- Codification system (software e.g MAXQDA)
- Occurrences and similarities (ULP Vs ULP and ULPs Vs Consortia call 1 & 2)
Method

6. MSHRQW
04/2013
?
Desk study
12/2012 & 02/2013
Desk study
08/2012
Desk study
08/2012
MSHRQW
05/2013
Ouagadougou
MSHRQW
03/2013
Dakar
MSHRQW
12/2012
Nairobi
MSHRQW
01/2013
Brazzaville
2 Concept notes
2 Core Groups
4/2013
?
Desk study
06/2012
Desk study
08/2012
Desk study
03/2013
PAEPARD II
4YE
Proposal
submitted to
CRF
?
1 Concept note
Core Group
11/2013
Ouagadougou
3 Concept notes
Core Group
?
?
1 Concept note
Core Group
9/2013
Douala
Consortium
Inception Workshop
3 Concept notes
10/2014
Proposal
submitted to
BMEL
?
Project- NutriHAF Africa 4/2015 to ?
Project- PAEPARD-FANRPAN ? to ?
Proposal
submitted to
Gates foundation
?
Project- FANRPAN ATONU ? to ?
• ULPs evolution
• Main achievements
ULPs progressed
ULP timeline FANRPAN developed concept
note & won CRF project (1)

7. - Commitment
- Collaboration
- Knowledge Creation &
Sharing
- Learning Process & Capacity
for reflexion
European & African stakeholders

8. Africain
71%
European
26%
Other
region
European
10%
African
90%
European & African stakeholders
Commitment
Was the engagement the same along the ULP steps?
Actors change
User remains constant

9. European & African stakeholders
Commitment
Motivations/Interests
Africa/European
Key constraints
o Interest for the thematic/federating
theme
o Share expertise & experience
o Developing new/existing business
opportunities in Africa (Ps)
o Collaborate with End user
o Funding (EU)
EU constraints
o Financial commitment: e.g
compensation for participation
of ULP activities
o Availability (long process- time
is money)
African constraints
o Diverse constraint (e.g
finance, time, communication
capacity)

10. European & African stakeholders
Collaboration
Level of trust
o Good
o Changes when a new partner is involved
(concept note/ proposal development step)
Key constraints to collaboration
o Money: e.g. travelling cost
o Time consuming
o Long/discontinuousà wait and
see attitude (commitment)
o Communication: Language barrier
o Private sector: exclusivity on the
results (IPR issues)
Power dynamics
o Toward African due to low participation
of European stakeholders
o Change with the type of activity (e.g
proposal development, researcher/non
researcher)

11. • Africans value the capacity of European to publish – increasing
visibility
• Europeans value users’ experience (from African perspective)
• Sharing knowledge/creation: constraint by the different
perspectives of research in ARD (research and non research
stakeholders )
European & African stakeholders
Knowledge Creation & Sharing

12. • Regional MSH dialogue on the priorities identified by users
(federating theme)
• Actor diversity and skill is a major strength
• Enhanced user (African) capacities to research based on their
priorities
• Strengthened user skills in interpreting requirement of funding mechanisms
• Increased their capacity to develop concept note & research proposal
European & African stakeholders
learning Process

13. NON ULP stakeholders
learning lessons
Level of trust
o Good
o EU trust increases when they start to see the
first result
Power dynamics
o Toward African
Key constraints to collaboration
o Funding -difficulty to maintain activities of the consortium

14. Yes
24%
No
76…
PAEPARD community
PAEPARD Users’ Led Process
Yes
63%
No
37%
Demand-led research
Yes
81%
No
19%
MSH R&I partnership

15. • Who should set the demand?
ü Users
ü All stakeholders
Researcher
60%
Balance
13%
Non-researcher
27%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Power Dynamic
0 1 2 3 4 5
Level of trust
PAEPARD community

16. • ULP process is a valid process but it is long (UE stakeholders
engagement is low). General acceptance of MSH Research and
Innovation partnership
• Funding : Process for engaging users in MSH R&I needs to be
adequately funded and dispersed in a timely manner
• Diverse funding including private sector necessary
• Enhanced capacity building (users/non-researchers, researchers,
African/EU). Value/importance of research increases
• CRF – This supports MSH R&I partnership and results (e.g.
publications, new products) are obtained in a shorter time frame;
EU commitment high.
• The research continues
Conclusions

17. On Agriculture Research for
Development EFARD
Laurianne Ollivier
Judith Francis
CTA
12/06/2016
Thank you
For your attention
Any Questions?