The challenge of HIV/AIDS: Where does agroforestry fit in? - World ...

80World Agroforestry into the Futureselected at ICRAF needs to be more transparentand rigorous.With regards to the output of policy research,there was considerable discussionwithin the group about whether it waspreferable to focus on developing a processor a product. Some experiences showthat leading with process work can havemore of an effect and creates its own demandsfor specific research products. Thisapproach should be considered throughoutthe institution. The next question waswhether the Centre should therefore beproactive in shaping policy processes andagendas. The group felt that building upfarmer representative groups as a voice fordefining and lobbying for priority policyagendas would enable the organization tomake better decisions.The group also recommended that ICRAFgives due attention to the administrativelevel and position of the policy makers withwhom it interacts. Although the organizationis in the process of learning about appropriatelevels of engagement, from localto international, nevertheless it is importantto be aware that specific policy problemsoften require specific types of decision makers.The Centre can help to bring policymakers from different sectors and scalestogether with researchers to debate policyissues. Even here, there are many optionsand pathways to choose from. Therefore, itis important to spend more effort on identifyingthe policy makers with whom ICRAFwishes to influence and interact, what thesepolicy-makers need, and how to communicateeffectively with them.Working group on scaling up,adoption and impact – reaching thevulnerable groupsThis working group discussed lessons fromits experiences both at the Centre and inother organizations. The group recognizedthat scaling up should not take a broadbrushapproach. The critical, vulnerablegroups should be identified and targeted,and different approaches are needed foreach one. Reaching the most-vulnerablepeople can be difficult; some studies havefound that they are less likely to belong toeasily identifiable groups in villages. So isit possible to reach such solitary farmers?GIS tools and maps that have advancedour ability to target technologies to specificagroclimatic conditions may be useful inidentifying these socioeconomic variablesand targeting vulnerable groups.Not only should scaling up efforts be targetedto particular groups, different situationsrequire different approaches. And notall situations require elaborate scaling upmechanisms: the group noted that sometechnologies ‘sell themselves’ and undergorapid spontaneous diffusion. Therefore, onelesson to learn is that we need to ensurethat all new technologies work well in theeyes of the farmers.The group agreed that ICRAF should investmore resources in learning from experiencesof scaling up, especially those thatinvolved different situations and technologies.Certain questions need to beanswered: What are the widely applicablemethods and lessons for disseminationprocesses? What is known about successfulextension materials? How can cadresof local people be persuaded to share theirexperiences? Institutionalization of lessonsis also important, to ‘cement them in’ andenable them to be built upon. Therefore,what are the best ways to take such lessonsinto mainstream extension, education andpolicy?The diffusion of new innovations/modificationsis a complicated process that facesmany challenges. However, it can bestrengthened by better horizontal and verticalfeedback systems that spread informationabout innovations. This will also helpto prevent negative consequences, such aswhere new information becomes dilutedduring the diffusion processes and leads toundesirable management practices.For adoption and impact of new technologies,researchers need to look at a rangeof indicators that relate to poverty. Thisis because some indicators move slowly,while others may not show a significanteffect from only one agroforestry improvement.This problem is exacerbated by alack of understanding of the key drivers ofadoption. More attention should be paidto studies of mature technologies. Oneparticular research gap the group identifiedwas how adoption of various practices isaffected by human health.An even weightier question the workinggroup discussed was the balance betweenreach and impact. Is it better for ICRAF totry and reach a large number of farmerswith little impact or fewer farmers but withlarger impacts? For example, should it aimfor broad productivity impacts or should ittry to invest more in targeting the poor andvulnerable? The group agreed that the Centrehas started on the right track by formingpartnerships, but that it does not yet haveall the right ones (i.e. improvements couldbe made in partnerships for research, educationand development) and there is stilltoo much fragmentation.Finally the group concluded with a brainstormingsession of what it considers to bepossible international public goods outputsin the area of scaling up:• methods that analyse scaling up experiencesand which could be applied bypartners;