ANNEX II

Key phases in AHI's evolution

Phase I (1995–1997)

Phase I of AHI employed a competitive grant system to foster multidisciplinary teamwork among diverse areas of agronomic expertise and to foster partnerships among national agricultural research institutes, agricultural extension institutions, and local communities. As could be expected, multidisciplinarity was relatively new to those involved and a great deal of effort was spent during this phase to raise awareness on the merits of collaborative research among scientists accustomed to deriving professional recognition from achievements within narrow scientific disciplines. Four countries were involved in this phase, namely Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, and Uganda. Two themes served to structure research cooperation: Integrated Pest Management (IPM), focusing on pests and diseases caused by soil nutrient depletion and agricultural intensification, and the Maintenance and Improvement of Soil Productivity (MISP). Regional research fellows (RRFs) with expertise in these areas were also hired to provide technical support to teams of grantees in the implementation of research programs. In an evaluation commissioned by ICRAF in May 1996, changes in direction were proposed to strengthen multidisciplinary collaboration. This led to a shift in operational modalities from a competitive grant system in Phase I to the use of benchmark sites to foster research cooperation and innovation in Phase II.

Phase II (1998–2000)

During this phase the country coverage was expanded to five to include Tanzania, and benchmark sites were selected in areas with high population density, evidence of natural resource degradation, and representative of broader eco-regions. This resulted in eight benchmark sites initially, two in Madagascar, two in Ethiopia, two in Kenya, one in Uganda, and one in Tanzania. Site teams composed of NARI scientists representing diverse disciplines (soils, plant breeding, livestock husbandry, entomology, and “socio-economics”) were constituted to carry out the work in each benchmark site. Site coordinators were identified and seconded to AHI either partially or fully (depending on the distance of sites to research stations) to coordinate the work in benchmark sites. The number and disciplinary diversity of RRFs were also expanded to include systems and participatory research perspectives. The second phase of AHI also saw the formation of a technical support group (TSC) consisting of site coordinators and the regional research team (regional research fellows and Regional Coordinator) to provide technical oversight to the work. The small grants were replaced with larger projects designed to enable multidisciplinary and multi-institutional teams from research and development (agricultural extension and/or civil society) organizations to work more holistically. An internal Planning, Monitoring, and Evaluation (PM&E) framework outlining the program purpose, specific goals, outputs, and strategy for implementation was also developed.

This phase led to the generation of a host of technological and methodological innovations for integrated natural resource management at farm level, including the integration of high-value crop varieties with soil nutrient management practices; “linked technologies” enhancing adoption through synergies among crop, soil, and livestock technologies; and innovations for pest and disease control.

An external review conducted in 2000 led to a number of further recommendations to orient future work, including:

•    bolstering the commitment of research managers from partner NARIs;

•    improving communication and documentation;

•    focusing and phasing of activities to concentrate on process and partnerships;

•    reducing the number of benchmark sites to enable more focused attention to research and dissemination, and to enable an expansion in scope to include innovations beyond the farm level;

•    introducing structural and procedural changes to reduce transaction costs;

•    using zonation for the purpose of dissemination and marketing of products;

•    strengthening the incorporation of socio-economic aspects into the research program; and

•    increasing the participation of farmers.

These recommendations clarified AHI's purpose in developing and testing methodological innovations for integrated natural resource management and supporting their institutionalization within the NARIs. It also encouraged an expanded focus of INRM to address issues that manifest themselves or require interventions beyond the farm level. The program was given a one-year (2001) transition period to refocus its activities in response to the demands of reviewers and key AHI stakeholders. The transition period was marked by the involvement of resource persons more experienced in “process-oriented” research to assist in charting out major areas of concentration in the next phase of AHI.

Phase III (2002–2004)

With experience gained through focused efforts in benchmark sites, and the greater confidence evident among participating institutions, farmers, and other stakeholders, the AHI entered its third phase. Defining features of the new mandate included:

•    stronger integration across disciplines, including social science;

•    expansion of the scale and scope of activities to include INRM at watershed level;

•    integration of technological and other forms of innovation at watershed and district levels; and

•    emphasis on decision-making processes as a foundation for the selection and application of technologies to suit specific socio-economic and biophysical situations expected to help in setting priorities and improving the focus of AHI activities.

During Phase III, a host of methodological innovations to harmonize interactions among local interest groups at landscape level were developed and tested. These innovations included efforts to enhance the equitability of technology dissemination and access, to foster collective action in pest control and soil and water management, to enhance the compatibility of trees with different landscape niches, and to integrate livelihood improvements with improved management of resources. They also included efforts to adapt the Landcare approach to the eastern Africa region.

Parallel initiatives were also undertaken during this phase with NARI managers, to support them in facilitating processes of self-led institutional change as a means of enhancing the impact orientation of research. This initiated a regional assessment of participatory research initiatives to derive “best practices,” and a series of national level workshops and pilot experiences at local research stations to design and test institutional innovations to mainstream such practices within national agricultural research institutes.

Phase IV (2005–2007)

The major focus of the fourth and final phase reported on in this volume was to scale out lessons and approaches through district institutional innovations, and to institutionalize the INRM approach within partner NARIs and other institutions in the region. Key targets for Phase IV included:

•    further development of the watershed approach, focusing on enabling collective action and integrating biophysical, social, and economic and market dimensions of farm and landscape management;

•    use of experiences and methods from the pilot sites combined with information from wider syntheses to derive good practices and methods for development agencies;

•    research to understand linkages and dynamics between vulnerability, poverty, livelihood strategies, economic growth, and NRM;

•    provision of relevant and timely information to district and national development actors and decision-makers; and

•    dissemination of “how to” information for INRM, with follow-up mentoring for institutional change in select research institutions in the ASARECA region.

Emphasis was also placed in Phase IV on knowledge management, including the documentation of past lessons and active learning, and on institutional innovation for broader uptake of lessons learnt.

AHI at present (2011)

While this book does not present work carried out by AHI after 2007, the program has a number of ongoing activities under the rubric of the Eastern Africa Programme of ICRAF – with the Regional Coordinator of AHI also coordinating ICRAF's work in the region. Ongoing projects which have either been developed under the AHI umbrella or include AHI as a major component include:

•    An initiative funded by IDRC, covering Ethiopia and Uganda, on “Going to Scale.” The project aims to further enhance the adaptive management capacities of rural communities for sustainable land management and devolve AHI approaches to national agricultural research institutes.

•    A project funded by IFAD, covering Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania, on “Enabling Rural Transformation and Grassroots Institution Building for Sustainable Land Management (SLM), Increased Incomes and Food Security.” The project aims to strengthen local institutions as key structures in implementing effective SLM by smallholder farmers.

•    An EU/IFAD funded project on “Evergreen Agriculture” in eastern and southern Africa. The initiative aims to scale up agroforestry-based conservation agriculture for improved nutrition, income, and environmental resilience in the region.