Capacity Development Framework - CGSpace Capacity... · About this document Capacity development is...

Capacity Development Framework Prepared by CGIAR Capacity Development Community of Practice for

the second round of CGIAR Research Programs Version date: 30th June 2015

Capacity Development Framework for the 2nd Round of CGIAR Research Programs

Version Date: 30th June 2015 Page | 1

Table of Contents About this document .............................................................................................................................. 2

Overview ................................................................................................................................................. 3

Assessing and addressing CRP capacity development needs ............................................................ 4

Elements of capacity development ....................................................................................................... 5

1. Capacity needs assessment and intervention strategy design ............................................... 6

2. Design and delivery of innovative learning materials and approaches .................................. 7

3. Develop CRPs and Centers’ partnering capacities ................................................................... 7

4. Developing future research leaders through fellowships ........................................................ 8

5. Gender-sensitive approaches throughout capacity development ........................................... 9

6. Institutional strengthening ......................................................................................................... 9

7. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of capacity development ................................................. 10

8. Organizational development ................................................................................................... 11

9. Research on capacity development ....................................................................................... 11

Capacity to innovate ........................................................................................................................... 11

Indicators of successful implementation .......................................................................................... 12

Annex 1. Acronyms .............................................................................................................................. 14

Annex 2. Tools, resources & contacts ............................................................................................... 15

Annex 3: Glossary ................................................................................................................................ 16

Annex 4: Examples of capacity development by element ................................................................ 19

Annex 5: Edits and additions based on partner and stakeholder comments ................................. 23

Endnotes .............................................................................................................................................. 27



About this document Capacity development is regarded by CGIAR as an effective vehicle for sustainable development, embedded within broader Center and CRP strategies. In the process to develop a new CGIAR Strategy and Results Framework 2016 - 2030 (SRF)i , Capacity Development (CapDev) was (re)affirmed as a strategic enabler of impact for both CGIAR and its partners. This has translated into a clear role for CapDev outlined in the SRF, which includes a dedicated section on CapDev, as well as an explicit Intermediary Development Outcome (IDO) and sub-IDOs on CapDev. According to the SRF CapDev “goes far beyond the transfer of knowledge and skills through training, and cuts across multiple levels –individual, organizational and institutional. To support implementation of this broader concept”.

It has been recognized as an important element for the CGIAR Research Programs (CRPs), and should be explicitly incorporated into the pre-proposal and full proposal phases for the 2nd generation of CRPs.

In order to realize this broader concept of CapDev strongly integrated within the second generation of CRPs, both the SRF and the Guidance Document for the CRPII proposals point to a Capacity Development Framework (this document) as the key reference for providing guidance on how to plan and implement CapDev activities.

The CGIAR Community of Practice (CoP) created this document to support the incorporation of CapDev into the proposals for the second generation CRPs. This document is kept intentionally short (the main text is only eleven pages long), and does not intend to provide a prescriptive set of steps. Instead, it is intended to present ideas, provide guidance, and foster dialogue which enables Centers and CRPs to incorporate capacity development into their planning. This framework has been worked on and is well understood by capacity development specialists across the systems who will be able to provide support in using the Framework and providing more subject-specific information and resources that will enable CRPs and Centers to operationalize recommendations and incorporate elements into programs.

The document was initially drafted by members ii of the CGIAR CapDev CoP, at a writeshop held 7–9 April 2014 in Montpellier, France. It was circulated widely to Center and CRP leadership, as well as partner organizations (notably through the GFAR Secretariat) during June–September 2014. The current version takes into account feedback from most CGIAR Centers/CRPs, a virtual meeting with 10 CRP Directors, as well as written feedback from over two dozen partner organizations and individuals, discussions with partners at FARA@15 in South Africa, reviews



and comments from the CGIAR science leaders group, comments made by internal and external partners during the consultations on the SRF (as part of GCARD3), and several interactions with the ‘capacity to innovate’ community.

This document offers a framework on how CGIAR and its partners can successfully integrate capacity development for both internal and external clients into CRPs. This framework indicates the key advantages that an integrated approach to capacity development can bring to CRPs, Centers and partners, and outlines the requirement for both an appropriate capacity needs assessment before any strategies can be outlined, as well as comprehensive research, monitoring and evaluation of capacity development throughout the process.

The ‘heart’ of this document is the nine capacity development elements that underpin the CapDev framework. These are identified and defined, underlining the complex and multifaceted nature, and acknowledging that uncertainty prevents us from linear prediction of outcomes. Part of the novelty of the framework is to see capacity development as supporting both the conduct of the science across the proposed portfolio of CGIAR agri-food system and global integrative programs, and the processes of innovation required for that science to benefit the poor. Therefore, this document advocates for the capacity to learn, innovate and adapt along impact pathways framed by Theories of Change of CRPs, with discussion of how these can be considered as part of the overall capacity development process.

Overview Capacity development is a crucial and strategic enabler in the complex process of achieving development outcomes through research. Successful capacity development programs enhance the ability of both CGIAR and its boundary partners1 to better contribute to achievement of important development goals and the particular objectives aimed at by CGIAR work, as outlined in the SRF. Capacity development occurs across multiple levels—individual, organizational and institutional—and covers a wider scope than the mere transfer of knowledge and skills through training. According to the SRF, “CGIAR can further leverage its capacity development by strengthening whole organizations and institutions, not just individuals. This means significant institutional changes are needed within CGIAR as well as in our relationships with our partners. The multiple dimensions of this change include: mainstreaming previously under-resourced areas such as nutrition, data management, information technologies, gender and resilience in research

1 The term boundary partner does not have a pejorative connotation. In fact it is the opposite because the boundary partners are the organization’s links to the world and it cannot survive without those links. It is a technical term, most commonly affiliated with the Outcome Mapping methodology. Please see full definition in Annex 3: Glossary



programs; engaging stakeholders and partners in new ways to ensure research leads to development; creating a culture of accountability and results-based management; and developing skills in resource mobilization and partnership building.” CRPs currently vary in their extent and approach to capacity development, which is not always well articulated, partly due to a low internal capacity or inadequate partnering and consultation with those who have the specialized knowledge and expertise. CRPs must make the leap from individual learning to demonstrating livelihood outcomes and impacts through relevant science and partnerships that facilitate research use by a wide range of stakeholders. This requires effective assessment and strategy formulation to plan and implement capacity development activities, tailored to the cultural, organizational and institutional contexts in which new knowledge needs to be applied. Capacity development will only be effective as a vehicle for sustainable development if it is embedded within the broader systems and processes i.e. CRPs’ Theories of Change (ToC), Impact Pathways (IPs) and the National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) that provide the unambiguous context and strategic framework for its implementation. Again the SRF highlights the benefits of this approach as “Efforts to mainstream new capacities in partner institutions should yield high returns. Activities will be embedded in ongoing research programs and will target key skill sets requested by partners, as well as by CGIAR itself. Alongside new approaches to enhancing the capacity to innovate, tried and tested mechanisms such as staff exchanges, sabbaticals and post-doctoral programs will continue to play a role in ensuring that CGIAR and its partners are equipped to deal with today’s rapidly evolving research agenda.”

Assessing and addressing CRP capacity development needs Capacity development should be an integral part of the CRPs’ Impact Pathways As such, the SRF includes an Intermediate Development Outcome (IDO) on capacity development: ‘National partners and beneficiaries enabled’, with four distinct sub-IDOs. Four additional sub-IDOs in other areas also focus on ‘capacity’ aspects. The identification of capacity needs across all levels and CRP structures and networks is the critical pre-requisite for designing capacity development strategies and interventions. A capacity needs assessment includes the process of identifying performance requirements to achieve outcomes and the disparity between the knowledge and/or capacity that presently exists and that which is further required within the CGIAR and among partners and



producers. This is a core part of both adult learning theories, and the adaptive management approaches that underpin many of the capacity development elements elaborated later in this paper. This framework provides guidelines on capacity needs assessment that can assist CRPs in several ways: equip practitioners with a background understanding of the core capacity issues to focus upon; highlight the importance of these capacities; show how CRP and partner efforts can be enhanced by external partners; and suggest ways to achieve research for development (R4D) goals by successfully deepening and implementing capacity. As well as supporting capacity development, this framework also offers direction for mainstreaming CapDev into the programming and operations of CRPs.iii The Guidance Note indicates that, “Capacity development should seek to enhance innovation throughout the agri-food system, including farmers and other groups along the value chain. To achieve this each CRP will use the CGIAR CapDev Framework for outlining and planning its capacity development activities. CRPs are required to demonstrate which of the nine elements of the CapDev Framework it will implementing and how.”

Several detailed guidelines and methodologies on capacity needs assessment, published in the last decade by reputable organizations already exist, and we do not suggest duplicating efforts or creating new guidelines for the CGIAR. Instead CapDev specialists across CGIAR, individually or through the CapDev Community of Practice, can facilitate access to existing guidelines and other materials, to help apply best practice and ensure that need assessments and a holistic approach to CapDev are embedded into any capacity development plans of CRPs. Further resources are described in the section Annex 2. Tools, Resources and Contacts. Elements of capacity development2 CGIAR has adopted a systems thinking approach to capacity development. The main innovation from this is that emphasis is placed upon defining the system as a whole, which is made up of interacting parts. It is also about recognizing complexity and knowing that one cannot always predict outcomes so one has to have the capacity to learn and adapt along impact pathways. Capacity development is hence a multifaceted process combining elements across several dimensions, which themselves are interrelated. In addition, capacity development is also linked with improved governance critical to outcomes. This 2 Figure 1 is not intended to infer a strict order, sequential process or hierarchy of elements involved in capacity development. The nine discrete but interrelated elements are interchangeable and the emphasis placed on each may vary according to the CRP’s goals, needs and resources. The section below presents the elements in alphabetical order, and the figure follows the same sequence.



framework proposes nine key elements of capacity development, illustrated in Figure 1. Each CRP should adapt and utilize the elements according to its needs and the particular setting of each CRP, guided by the requirement to attain the cross-cutting capacity development IDO. Although CRPs do not have to include all nine elements in its capacity development strategy, it is advised that a minimum set of elements should be applied to convincingly achieve expected outcomes. Examples of activities for each element are provided in Annex 4.

1. Capacity needs assessment and intervention strategy design • Identifying appropriate interventions for the intended audience in

appropriate formats • Focus investments and leverage other resources

CRPs should develop strategies and interventions for capacity development based on and aligned with each CRP’s ToC and Impact Pathways, emerging opportunities, and partners’ needs and solutions. Capacity needs assessment tools and approaches, customized for CRPs, need to be designed, or adapted from existing models (or both). Needs assessments should determine the gap between required and existing competencies at different levels to deliver expected outputs, achieve outcomes and contribute toward broader development

Figure 1: Elements of Capacity Development



goals. In addition, CRPs may include an assessment of gaps in staff, infrastructure and equipment required for effective research all the way through to delivery. These assessments will help to attract and target appropriate investments, develop partnerships, leverage other resources available for capacity development and provide benchmarks for future monitoring, evaluation and impact assessment.

2. Design and delivery of innovative learning materials and approaches • Content development • Adult learning theory and instructional design • Harnessing technology for CapDev initiatives

CRPs need to invest in innovative content development and knowledge sharing mechanisms, which are firmly anchored in best practices in learning and instructional design theories (including use of Information and Communication Technologies—ICTs). Such mechanisms will make the research process and the subsequent co-created knowledge products more suitable, accessible and appealing to a wider range of users. At the same time, knowledge sharing of research approaches and lessons learned help to avoid duplicating what others have already done and encourages cumulative learning.

3. Develop CRPs and Centers’ partnering capacities • Identifying and brokering appropriate partnerships models • Assessing and developing partners’ capacity

There is a widespread assumption that everyone can successfully create and sustain effective partnerships, but in practice, individuals and organizations differ in their capacity to collaborate. CRPs must face the challenge to move from research partnerships to broader, strategic and effective multi-stakeholder partnerships that will bolster development processes, from collective diagnosis of problems to co-creation of knowledge and implementation of solutions for impact. This includes partnerships with local organizations, NGOs and institutions adept at developing capacity, particularly for producers and other stakeholders. It also includes partnerships with local organizations and institutions that have the capacity to provide important feedback and input into CRP strategies and research. Specific methodologies need to be developed and applied to enhance the capacity of CRPs and Centers to identify the appropriate partners to support CRPs’ Theories of Change and Impact Pathways. The capacity of current or potential partners, as well as farmers and other key stakeholders, is of crucial importance and needs to be systematically assessed and supported.



Full proposals for CRPII will need to include a detailed partnership strategy that includes the following elements: 1. Partnerships at the discovery, proof of concept, and pilot level (if relevant) and scaling-up phase. 2. Engagement and dialogue with stakeholders 3. Alignment with regional initiatives 4. Engagement with the private sector. 5. Identify and demonstrate the role of partners in research and management/ governance. 7. Appropriate resourcing of partnerships. All of these partnership principles and activities need to be based on key factors that can contribute to their success, including: a common agenda, shared measurement (e.g. data collection and analysis), activities coordinated through a mutually reinforcing plan of action, consistent and open communication lines, and backbone and coordination support. All of this will require strong capacities by both CGIAR entities as well as partners to identify, establish and maintain meaningful partnerships towards realizing valuable goals. CapDev should offer ways to understand the capacities needed as well as how those capacities can be met, and how this can be monitored along the way.

4. Developing future research leaders through fellowships • Convergence of policies and procedures within and across CRPs • Strategic focus of investments in fellowship programs • Strategic focus given to on-the-job-training to maintain competences

of existing staff and partners relevant throughout their careers. Fellowships and mentorships supported by CGIAR Centers and CRPs provide future research leaders with the opportunity to work with teams of experienced scientists in the field and in laboratories to develop capacity on research methods, processes and management. It also helps them to participate in global research networks that today influence access to resources and scientific information. The policies and procedures governing fellowship and mentorship programs across CGIAR require harmonization. CRPs must improve links with ARIs and NARS in the area of fellowships, which will benefit the capacity of ARIs and NARS, and at the same time significantly raise the opportunities for scientists to develop capacities in key areas that directly support achievement of outcomes.



Fellowship initiatives from CRPs and Centers need to be strategic, aligned at the CGIAR level, and should encourage co-financing from partners so that CGIAR investments have a bigger impact. The system can provide practical, hands-on mentorship in well-resourced research laboratories and experiment stations, as well as in farmers’ fields. An example of such a CGIAR facility is the Nairobi-based BecA–ILRI Hub, co-created by ILRI and African Union (AU)’s New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) to provide cutting-edge biosciences facilities for Eastern and Central African researchers.

In addition, CRPs and Centers need to improve monitoring and evaluation of fellowship programs to improve them and to provide evidence of their value and contribution to longer-term outcomes. In addition to fellowships, there is a need for CRPs to deliver appropriate on-the-job training program, to allow staff and the NARS to grow and improve their performance by becoming more innovative and responsive to change, and maintain up-to-date knowledge and skills.

5. Gender-sensitive approaches throughout capacity development • Provide expert capacity development input into CRPs’ gender strategies • Ensure gender dimension is incorporated into capacity development

activities • Leadership & women-entrepreneurship development

Capacity development has strong links to CRPs’ gender-related R&D activities. Gender mainstreaming is reciprocal and the capacity development and gender communities can work hand in hand to capture synergies and share resources. Incorporating gender dimensions into capacity development actions, and using appropriate capacity development tools and methods in gender strategies, can enhance the achievement of gender- related goals and overall outcomes.

6. Institutional strengthening • Institutional assessments to inform policy design and reform • Facilitate and engage in multi-stakeholder dialogues • Develop capacity of decision makers to use research outputs

Strong institutions—the formal and informal rules that structure and constrain human behavior and interaction—help CRPs and Centers focus on relevant research, fully engage with partners and stakeholders in the research process and the subsequent use of research results to achieve outcomes. Yet, many challenges exist for institutions in developing contexts, including low investment



in activities to strengthen institutions. CRPs need to design and use institutional capacity assessment tools and communication methodologies to identify appropriate partners and interventions, and prioritize capacity development interventions at the institutional level. This includes, but is not limited to, informing and participating in policy design and implementation to improve legal frameworks and the functioning of markets and policies. Development of institutional capacities may include advocacy and policy dialogues through and with multi-stakeholder forums, engaging decision makers throughout the research process, advising decision makers on legislation and innovation programs, and establishing action research projects with partners to test and adapt new institutional arrangements. This helps to address what is laid out in the SRF that “CGIAR can further leverage its capacity development by strengthening whole organizations and institutions, not just individuals. Efforts to mainstream new capacities in partner institutions should yield high returns, but significant institutional changes are also needed within CGIAR as well as in our relationships with our partners. Activities to achieve all of this should be embedded in ongoing research programs and will target key skill sets requested by partners, as well as by CGIAR itself.”

7. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of capacity development • Integrating capacity development into monitoring and evaluation

systems across the CRP ecosystem • Capturing lessons learned for replication and upscaling

All CRPs and Centers are developing M&E frameworks. However, traditional capacity development indicators based on training alone are insufficient as they are restricted to counting the number of (gender disaggregated) trainees. CRPs should foster collaboration between the capacity development and M&E functions to explore different approaches that also track CapDev at organizational and institutional levels, and equally capture ‘capacity to innovate’ dimensions. The CGIAR CapDev CoP in collaboration with the Capacity to Innovate Community and Evaluation specialists have developed a set of CapDev indicators for use across CRPs, experimental and quasi-experimental trials, mixed-methods approaches that focus on rapid feedback loops, and action research. These indicators are useful for planning CapDev activities as well as monitoring and evaluating CapDev activities by individual CRPs as well as across the whole Portfolio.



8. Organizational development • Developing CRPs organizational capacity to move along the R4D

process • Enhancing NARS research and research management capacity • Strengthening boundary partners for research uptake

CRPs and Centers require organization development with stronger capacities to implement research that leads to outcomes. In addition, many national agricultural research systems, including universities with which CRPs and Centers collaborate lack strong capacities in and around research for development. Similarly, the organizational capacity of rural advisory service providers, including extension, and other boundary partners who adapt research results and share them with the next level of users may be weak and constrain the up-scaling of research-based solutions. Therefore, CRPs need capacities to better engage with NARS and boundary partners in identifying and addressing such organizational weaknesses, so that innovations are taken to scale. Likewise, CRPs need to support organizational development of the national research systems and boundary partners critical to achieving outcomes. This is more likely to happen if boundary partners are involved throughout the process, and participate from the inception phase, including in the needs assessment.

9. Research on capacity development • Learning what worked in what context • Action research

In order to develop more effective approaches for capacity development, CRPs and Centers will need research on capacity development to learn what worked in each context, how and for whom to inform the design and implementation of capacity development interventions. For example, multi-stakeholder action-research can enable adaptive iterations through scanning trends, monitoring capacity changes, and cross-CRP exchange of experiences. Research on capacity development will help project teams to continually examine, fine-tune and improve management processes. This in turn will contribute to a more effective project and ultimately to achievement of outcomes and impacts. There is a need to remember that capacity development is a process and CRPs need to learn through reflecting on how it is or is not working.

Capacity to innovate Advancing innovation, alongside advancing agri-food systems science are the core elements of CGIAR’s mission. CapDev, as described in the nine elements above, will contribute to CGIAR’s mission not only by supporting the ability to carry out high quality science but also by enhancing the capacity to innovate of



the systems of actors that develop, interact and use the results of CGIAR research. Traditionally, capacity development has focused on the former. Expanding the scope of CGIAR capacity development to explicitly include capacity to innovate is part of the jump for which this framework is calling. Doing so will require Center, CRP and partner theories of change to be explicit about how they will develop capacity to innovate. This in turn implies a proactive role for those championing capacity development to engage in building Center, CRP and partner impact pathways and theories of change. Specifically they will need to show how capacity development activities are contributing to one or more of the core competencies that constitute system capacity to innovate. These include (Leeuwis et al., 20143) the ability to:

• Continuously identify and prioritize problems and opportunities in a dynamic systems environment.

• Take risks, experiment with social and technical options, and assess the trade-offs that arise from these.

• Mobilize resources and form effective support coalitions around promising options and visions for the future.

• Link with others in order to access, share and process relevant information and knowledge in support of the above.

• Understand how change comes about in complex systems and how to intervene effectively.

• Embed research activity in ongoing processes of change.

Indicators of successful implementation The successful design and implementation of a CRP’s capacity development strategy, building on the elements outlined in this document, will require adequate levels of investment sustained over periods sufficiently long to allow the efforts to mature. CRPs will begin to track and analyze how capacity development is incorporated and budgeted in annual and mid-term plans, against the back-drop of agreed ToC and Impact Pathways. CRPs also need to design incentives to encourage scientists to support and directly undertake capacity development, both their own and of their Centers and partners. Capacity development is a cross-cutting issue in the new CGIAR SRF to be measured in terms of progress towards four sub-IDOs (ibid. p31 Figure 3: SRF cross-cutting issues and outcomes at the Intermediate Development Outcome (IDO) and sub-IDO levels):

1. Enhanced institutional capacity of partner research organizations 3 Leeuwis, C., Schut, M., Waters-Bayer, A., Mur, R., Atta-Krah, K., Douthwaite, B. (2014) CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Penang, Malaysia. Program Brief: AAS-2014-29



2. Enhanced individual capacity in partner research organizations through training and exchange

3. Increased capacity for innovation in partner research organizations 4. Increased capacity for innovation in partner development organizations

and in poor and vulnerable communities. Progress towards the first two dimensions can be evaluated through metrics derived directly from the nine elements above, and supported by the set of indicators developed specifically for CapDev. The Centers and CRPs need to monitor and evaluate investments and reflect on, analyze and exchange lessons learned across CRPs to facilitate organizational learning and improving capacity development across the CGIAR, while also reducing the risks that activities result in negative impacts. This would contribute to better-managed organizational change and continuous improvement of their research for development approaches. Due to its novelty and complexity, CGIAR’s monitoring and evaluation of capacity development will require attention. It must integrate traditional indicators (typically, gender-disaggregated counting of short- and long-term trainees) with new metrics and procedures covering the broad set of elements described in this document. Additionally, several Intermediate Development Outcomes of the CGIAR highlight specific capacity development dimensions and these will also require monitoring and evaluation using the CapDev indicators.



Annex 1. Acronyms

ARI Advanced Research Institute

CapDev Capacity Development

CIFOR Center for International Forestry Research

CIP International Potato Center

CoP Community of Practice

CPWF Challenge Program on Water and Food

CRP CGIAR Research Program

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FTA Forest, Trees and Agroforestry CRP

GCS Global Support Component of United Nations Fund for Climate Change

ICARDA International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas

ICRAF World Agroforestry Center

ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics

ICT Information and Communication Technology

IDO Intermediate Development Outcome

IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute

IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture

ILAC Institutional Learning and Change Initiative ( of CGIAR)

ILRI International Livestock Research Institute

IP Impact Pathway

IWMI International Water Management Institute

L & F Livestock and Fish CRP

M & E Monitoring and Evaluation

NARS National Agricultural Research System

R4D Research for Development

REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation

ToC Theory of Change

UNDP United Nations Development Program



Annex 2. Tools, resources & contacts We welcome any feedback. Please email Dr. Iddo Dror at [email protected]

Capacity development materials: The International Service for National Agriculture Research (ISNAR) produced useful materials related for capacity development for the CGIAR. Although these materials were produced several years ago, most of the information is still useful. A wide range of materials are available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/landingpage/collection/p15738coll11

Examples of participatory approaches to research: A number of resources are available, including: http://cg-parade.wikispaces.com/product_profiles; The Institute for Development Studies website for participatory approaches: http://www.participatorymethods.org/

Resources on partnerships: ILAC has developed numerous resources and materials. These include a curated list of publications on partnerships: http://www.cgiar-ilac.org/content/partnership; And a report: http://www.cgiar-ilac.org/files/publications/reports/ILAC%20Peer-Assisted%20Report_Final.pdf

CGIAR partnership strategy: The CGIAR developed a strategy document on partnerships as part of the reform process, The Future of Partnerships in the CGIAR: http://www.cgiar.org/www-archive/www.cgiar.org/changemanagement/pdf/WG2_FutureofPartnerships_FINAL_Sept16_2008.pdf

Resources on evaluating capacity development: Publications on evaluating capacity have been developed by ILAC. See: Evaluating capacity development resources and publications www.cgiar-ilac.org/content/evaluating-capacity-development

Capacity development portal for agriculture: The FAO has a portal for capacity development that provides learning modules and good practices, among other resources:www.fao.org/capacitydevelopment/en/

Capacity development in the private sector: There are many books and publications about developing capacities in private firms, especially capacities to innovate. Among other resources: Harvard Business School, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness (http://www.isc.hbs.edu/research-areas/Pages/innovation-and-innovative-capacity.aspx); various articles in the Harvard Business Review (https://hbr.org/); and Skarzynsky, P. and Gibson, R. 2008. Innovation to the Core. A Blueprint for Transforming the Way Your Company Innovates. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business Press.

mailto:[email protected]

http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/landingpage/collection/p15738coll11

http://cg-parade.wikispaces.com/product_profiles

http://www.participatorymethods.org/

http://www.cgiar-ilac.org/content/partnership

http://www.cgiar-ilac.org/files/publications/reports/ILAC%20Peer-Assisted%20Report_Final.pdf

http://www.cgiar-ilac.org/files/publications/reports/ILAC%20Peer-Assisted%20Report_Final.pdf

http://www.cgiar.org/www-archive/www.cgiar.org/changemanagement/pdf/WG2_FutureofPartnerships_FINAL_Sept16_2008.pdf



http://www.cgiar-ilac.org/content/evaluating-capacity-development

http://www.cgiar-ilac.org/content/evaluating-capacity-development

http://www.fao.org/capacitydevelopment/en/

http://www.isc.hbs.edu/research-areas/Pages/innovation-and-innovative-capacity.aspx

http://www.isc.hbs.edu/research-areas/Pages/innovation-and-innovative-capacity.aspx

https://hbr.org/



Annex 3: Glossary Boundary partner: Boundary partners are those individuals, groups, or organizations with whom the program interacts directly and with whom the program can anticipate opportunities for mutual influence. These actors are called boundary partners because, even though the program will work with them to effect change, it does not control them.

Clarification: The term boundary partner does not have a pejorative connotation. In fact it is the opposite because the boundary partners are the organization’s links to the world and it cannot survive without those links. In the network literature, boundary partners are the ones that connect otherwise dissociated parts of the network and are critical for the diffusion of influence and information.

Sources: Earl, S., Carden, F., & Smutylo, T. (2001). Outcome mapping: Building learning and reflection into development programs. Ottawa, ON, Canada: International Development Research Centre. Retrieved from http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Publications/openebooks/959-3/index.html.

Capacity: The ability of an individual or organization to consistently achieve results that resemble what was originally aspired.

Clarification: An organization’s capacities stem from the interaction among resources (individuals and fixed capital), processes (how things are done), and values (including the organizational culture and mission). In new organizations, skills reside in resources, especially its human resources. In time, the skills in successful organizations are transferred to processes and values.

Sources: Dosi, G., R.R. Nelson and S.G. Winter. 2000. Introduction: The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities. In Dosi, G., R.R. Nelson and S.G. Winter (eds.), The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities, New York: Oxford University Press.

Capacity development: The process whereby people, organizations and society unleash, strengthen, create, adapt and maintain capacity over time.

Clarification: Capacity development is a non-linear complex process of change, internally or externally initiated, that occurs in and between individuals, organizations, institutions and their networks that strengthens linkages and the (collective) capabilities of systems to innovate, deliver development impact and create (social) value. This process takes place within an overall environment that requires constant adaptation to internal

http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Publications/openebooks/959-3/index.html

http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Publications/openebooks/959-3/index.html



and external contextual changes. This definition is in contrast to more linear conceptions of ‘capacity building as training’, in which individual human resources increase competencies through training and skills development.

Sources: Fukuda-Parr, S., C. Lopes, K. Malik eds (2002) Capacity for Development: New solutions to old problems. New York: Earthscan Publications.; Horton, D., Mackay, R., Andersen, A., & Dupleich, L. (2000). Evaluating Capacity Development in Planning, Monitoring, and Evaluation: A Case from Agricultural Research, Research Report No 17. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR).; http://preval.org/files/2104.pdf; FAO (2004). Report of the first session of the Working Party on Human Capacity Development in Fisheries. Rome, 19–22 April 2004 http://www.fao.org/3/a-y5568e/y5568e04.htm; OECD (2006) The Challenge of Capacity Development: Working towards good practice.

Individual capacities: The ability to do, experience, or understand something that result from the combination of innate and acquired abilities including talent, task commitment, creativity and education.

Clarification: Because individual capacities result from the interaction between innate and acquired abilities, each individual is good at a few things and not as good at all things.

Sources: Shavinina, L.V. and K.L.Seeratan. 2003. On the Nature of Individual Innovation. In Shavinina, L.V. (ed.), The International Handbook on Innovation, UK: Pergamon.

Innovation system: A network of organizations, enterprises, and individuals focused on bringing new products, new processes, and new forms of organization into use, together with the institutions and policies that affect their behavior and performance.

Clarification: The innovation is new for the innovating agent, but not necessarily for the world or even her country. An innovation can combine existing knowledge, indigenous knowledge and/or scientific information in new ways. For example, in the 1990s small farmers in Ghana learned how to use a sighting pole to plant maize in rows; but that is hardly an innovation in most other countries (Ekbor, Boa and Dankyi 2002).

Sources: Rajalahti, R. 2012. Sourcebook Overview and User Guide. In Rajalahti, R. (ed.) Agricultural Innovation Sourcebook. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.; Ekboir, J., K. Boa, and A.A. Dankyi. 2002. Impacts of No-Till Technologies in Ghana. Mexico D.F.:CIMMYT.

Institutions: The formal and informal rules that structure and constrain human behavior and interaction.

http://preval.org/files/2104.pdf

http://www.fao.org/3/a-y5568e/y5568e04.htm



Clarification: They include the legal rules (e.g., laws and regulations), social norms and ideologies, accepted and established practices, contractual arrangements, accepted and established practices, ideas that govern organizations, policies and processes, and management strategies that influence choices and decision making. The institutional environment is the fundamental set of rules, both formal and informal, that govern production, exchange and distribution within a society. Institutional arrangements, on the other hand, are specific arrangements between parties to a contract that govern the way the parties co-operate and/or compete.

Sources: Douglass North. 1991. “Institutions.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), pp. 97–112.

Organization: A group of actors that collaborate over a sustained period.

Clarification: An organization can be either formal or informal, for instance, self-help groups, value chain committees and networks. Collaboration may take different forms, including frequent exchanges of information, joint priority setting for policies and programs, and joint implementation of innovation projects.

Sources: Ekboir, J.M. and R. Rajalahti. 2012. Coordination and Collective Action for Agricultural Innovation. In Rajalahti, R. (ed.) Agricultural Innovation Sourcebook. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.; Capacity Development: Definitions, Issues and Implications for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, Charles Lusthaus, Marie-Hélène Adrien, Mark Perstinger

Organizational capacities: The ability to do, experience, or understand something that result from the combination of an organization’s resources, processes and values.

Clarification: The resources are the people and physical assets an organization can command; in general, resources can be hired, bought or built. The processes, whether formal or informal, define how an organization transforms inputs into products; routines (often tacit) are an important component of processes. Finally, the values define what the organization should do and guide the everyday, independent decisions of its members. The organizational culture is an important element of an organization’s values.

Sources: Christensen, C.M. 2003. The Innovator’s Dilemma: The Revolutionary National Bestseller that Changed the Way We Do Business. Harper Business Essentials, New York: Harper Collins Publishers.



Annex 4: Examples of capacity development by element Capacity Development Elements

Examples (CRP/Center)

Capacity needs assessment and intervention strategy design

- Rapid Capacity needs assessment of Rwandan Agricultural Extension System (FTA)

- Capacity needs assessment of FTA CGIAR and boundary partners as a research program (FTA)

- Capacity needs assessment in MRV across the countries studied in the GCS REDD+ resulting in MRV country profiles(CIFOR)

- Capacity needs assessment of NARS (ICARDA) - Gender capacity assessment methodology design and piloting

in at least four Livestock and Fish CRP programs leading to Capacity Development Strategy and intervention design for Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Uganda, Tanzania, most likely India (L&F)

- Capacity assessment methodology design and piloting in Uganda specifically for the pig (commodity) value chain leading to Capacity Development Strategy and intervention design (L&F)

- Gender Scoping Study achieved in 7 countries; it fed the development of the GCDOC Approach (WORLDFISH)

- Gender Capacity Development and Organizational Culture Approach (GCDOC) in WorldFish and AAS; conceptual framework developed (WORLDFISH)

- - Research in Development self-assessment by implementation teams as part of a broader program priority area on RinD capacity development (AAS)

- CIP’s assessment of existing sweetpotato training and extension materials

Design and delivery of innovative learning materials and approaches

- Webinars on agricultural and forestry technologies for climate mitigation and adaption (FTA)

- Manuals on agroforestry, eg. plant nursery design and management (ICRAF)

- Online repositories of livestock and tree husbandry resources (ILRI, ICRAF)

- REDD+ training materials (CIFOR) - Training manual on conducting experimental games, available

in Bahasa Indonesia, Spanish, English (CIFOR) - Blended learning courses for Feed Assessment Tools, including

e-learning content and a Learning Management System (ILRI) - Modular content on eight best bet themes for pig value chain in

Uganda (L&F) - Learning alliances and mentorships with local government

project implementers (IWMI, CIAT) - Development of a blended learning approach to RinD capacity

development through engagement in innovation systems (AAS) - Use of learning portals in WorldFish and AAS - KSIConnect highlights the most interesting projects, cutting-

edge research, and success stories to a global audience in the form of open information and educational video resources, face-to-face virtual training and learning sessions and virtual expert-farmer interactions. Talks by experts are live-streamed



and recorded for viewing offline. (ICRISAT) - The AgED Open Courseware is an on-line learning platform. It

offers a research infused curriculum providing life-long learning opportunities to students, faculty members, extension agents, smallholder farmers and others through open educational resources. (ICRISAT)

- Krishi Gyan Sagar and Krishi Vani.The Green Phablet powered by the Green SIM is an ICT mediated extension system (mobile and web apps, voice advisory services, participatory video extension methods) which brings out the best affordable technologies, knowledge solutions, availability of quality inputs, credit and insurance to smallholder farmers, anchored on public-private partnership. (ICRISAT)

- A seven volume toolkit on Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Sweetpotato. Training of trainers manual - in English, Swahili, Portuguese and French (RAC, CIP, NRI, HKI)

- A five-volume toolkit on Engendered Orange-fleshed Sweetpotato Project Planning, Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation Learning Module – in English and Portuguese (RAC, CIP and Zenette Associates)

- Three OFSP investment guide products to help advocate for increased investment in Africa (RAC, CIP, NRI, HKI)

o Orange-fleshed Sweetpotato Investment Guide o Orange-fleshed Sweetpotato Investment

Implementation Guide o Orange-fleshed Sweetpotato Investment Summary

- Develop CRPs and Centers’ capacity to partner

- Develop partner assessment criteria (ICRAF) - Training in policy and media research delivered to in-country

partners in GCS’ Module 1, which enabled them to develop a profile in their countries and participate in the REDD+ debate more prominently (CIFOR)

- Training on innovation platforms and integrated assessment and modelling of agricultural systems (ICARDA)

- Strategy note on embedding Public Private Partnerships and collaborative capacity arrangements in the Ethiopia value chain (L&F)

- Development of a framework for supporting partnerships for collective impact (AAS)

- Training on innovation platforms – Humidtropics (IITA/ILRI) Developing future research leaders through fellowships

- Female Postdoctoral Program (ICRAF, Bioversity) - MS and PhD Fellowship programs (All Centers/CRPs) - African Plant Breeding Academy of the African Orphan Crops

Consortium (ICRAF) - Working in partnership with DAAD, AWARD and various

Academic Institutions (all Centers and CRPs) - ILRI-BecA Hub - African Challenge Biosciences Fund (ABCF)

fellowship program targeting NARs - Policies and Procedure Guidelines for Research Fellows and

Interns (ICRAF, ILRI, ICARDA) - Supervision Toolkit for ICRAF students and supervisors (ICRAF) - Student Management Information System (ICRAF, ILRI) - Graduate Fellowship Program - Support to Agricultural



Research of Strategic Crops (AfDB/IITA) - Humidtropics Graduate Fellowship Program (IITA/ILRI)

Gender-sensitive approaches throughout capacity development

- ACM manual/guide for practitioners for facilitating gender equitable and transformative forest resource use and management available in English and Spanish (CIFOR)

- The Gender Box: a framework for analyzing gender roles in forestry—English, French and Spanish (CIFOR)

- Guide for integrating gender into forestry—Bahasa Indonesia, Spanish, French, English (CIFOR)

- Proposal development guidelines for integrating gender into research proposals—Bahasa Indonesia, Spanish, French, English (CIFOR)

- Gender annotated bibliography (CIFOR) - Proposal assessment tool on gender for managers or

reviewers—Bahasa Indonesia, Spanish, French, English (CIFOR) - Guide to gender analysis in agroforestry (ICRAF) - Tips for asking gender-responsive questions (Bioversity) - Practical tips for conducting gender-responsive data collection

(Bioversity) - Gender Capacity Development and Organizational Change

initiative (WorldFish & AAS) Institutional strengthening

- Smallholder Dairy Project, which helped change the policy environment of Kenya’s dairy sector (ILRI)

- Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System (ReSAKSS), an Africa-wide network of regional nodes supporting implementation of the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP). ReSAKSS offers high-quality analyses and knowledge products to improve policymaking, track progress, document success, and derive lessons for the implementation of the CAADP agenda and other agricultural and rural development policies and programs in Africa. (IFPRI/ILRI/IWMI/IITA)

- Reaching Agents of Change (RAC) project, which successfully tested innovative approaches to strengthen institutional and individual capacity to advocate for increased investment for orange-fleshed sweetpotato (OFSP) programs and projects and policy change to combat vitamin A deficiency among young children and women of reproductive age (CIP)

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of capacity development

- Capacity Development Reporting Databases (ICRAF) - Project Impact Assessments of Capacity Development (ICARDA) - Tracer study on VLS Scholars/Trainees (ICRISAT) - Developing a framework for measurement of Capacity to

Innovate (cross systems CRPs) - Engendered Orange-fleshed Sweetpotato Project Planning,

Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation Learning Module (CIP) – in English and Portuguese

- Training database (IITA) Organizational development

- Mentoring program for young ICRAF researchers (ICRAF) - Training courses on Cross cutting subjects open to ICARDA

staff - Learning alliances to strengthen local facilitation capacity for

promoting innovation, participatory research and community



engagement (IWMI and CPWF) - Developing capacity to manage research outputs (IITA)

Research on capacity development

- Testing rapid capacity needs assessment frameworks for agricultural development grants (ICRAF)

- Testing the viability of Innovation Platforms in different contexts (ILRI)

- Innovation platforms in the framework of CRP DS (ICARDA) - Research on building capacity to innovate as a development

outcome and understanding the role of capacity development starting from within as part of that (AAS)

- Action research on training trainers – Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Sweetpotato courses in selected African countries (CIP and Helen Keller International)



Annex 5: Edits and additions based on partner and stakeholder comments

The document was initially drafted by members of the CGIAR CapDev CoP, at a Writeshop held 7-9 April 2014 in Montpellier, France. It was circulated widely to Center and CRP leadership, as well as through partner organizations (notably through the GFAR Secretariat) during June-September 2014. The current version takes into account feedback from most CGIAR Centers/CRPs, a virtual meeting with 10 CRP Directors, as well as written feedback from over two dozen partner organizations and individuals.

Below is a summary of the changes incorporated in the review process.

Section of change

Change/edit Commenter

General ‘Guidelines’ was changed to

‘Framework’ in recognition that the document is not detailed guidelines, but that the ‘Framework’ would be followed on by additional and more detailed guiding documents related to operationalizing

General

Additional references and clarify on engaging partners in processes and co-creation of knowledge; edited areas where the focus was on research outputs appeared linear and emphasized the integrated, system approach

Radcliffe (EC); Hawkins (ICRA); Daane; Keatinge (AIRCA)

Clarified the purpose of framework and that the elements/approach would need to be based on context and goals of each CRP; clarified that elements are not prioritized as that would depend on the context and goals of each CRP

Daane; Kantiza (PLEAD); General

Added glossary in the annexes to address lack of clarity on certain terms used in Framework

General

Executive summary

Included targets for CapDev that are both internal and external

IWMI; Gibson (UNE); Keatinge (AIRCA);

Reviewed the use of the term boundary; included the definition in the glossary

Keatinge (AIRCA); Nicholls (CABI); General



Stated the purpose Witte (USAID) Value Proposition

‘Journey’ statement edited in consideration of the comment that this sounded linear

Daane

Elements 0. General/intro Interrelated nature of elements was

added in the introduction to the elements to clarify that the elements are not prescriptive, prioritized or mutually exclusive, but understood as integrated and interrelated.

Daane

Clarification that the elements would be adapted to each CRP based on context and need

As per above

Noted in relation to complexity that CapDev also relates to governance generally

IWMI

1. Needs assessment

Needs assessments purpose edited for clarity

CIP

Added the need for assessing infrastructure and equipment that may be needed to achieve outcomes as part of capacity

Khalifa (Kurdistan)

2. Design of innovative materials

Gains from knowledge sharing added CIP Reduced emphasis on ‘research

outputs’ toward more agricultural innovation systems approach and co-creation of appropriate knowledge products depending on the next and end users

Hawkins (ICRA) Berman (FAO)

3. Capacity to partner

Added/emphasized the need to partner with those who support CapDev

Daane; IWMI; ICARDA; Nicholls (CABI)

Specific mention on partnering for CapDev of farmers/stakeholders

Radcliffe (EC); ICARDA; Nicholls (CABI); Khalifa Adediran (GALVmed)

Edited section on levels of ability to Radcliffe (EC)



collaborate to read more positive More on value/purpose of partnering

throughout the research process ICARDA; Nicholls (CABI); Cherbonnier (KIT); Berman (FAO)

4. Research leaders

Emphasized R4D leadership creation General Added the opportunity to do field and

lab research, learn methods for fellows

Elliot (via CIAT)

Added point on M & E to show value/evidence of contribution to outcomes

IWMI

Emphasized that ARIs and NARS also benefit from fellowship

CIP

Added mentorships YPARD 5. Gender More emphasis that CapDev can

enable CRPs to achieve gender goals/outcomes

IWMI

6. Institutional More on engaging throughout process

and moving away from just handing over completed research outputs

ICARDA; Radcliffe (EC); Daane

Strengthened point on the value of having strong institutions

ICARDA; IWMI (Kai) Sanginov

Included clarification and more text on informing policy and implementation

CIP; Witte (USAID); Sanginov

7. M & E Added point on the need for

collaboration between CoPs for CapDev and Evaluation

IWMI; Cap Dev CoP

8. Organizational Clearly stated that CRPs and Centers

also require organizational development

IWMI; Vergara (IIRR); Hawkins (ICRA); Cherbonnier (KIT)

Universities added Elliot (via CIAT) Explicitly stated ‘extension’ rather

than assume NARS included extension and university/research institutions

Khalifa

Clarified on the organization development of partners and the

IWMI (Kai W.); Witte (USAID)



value. 9. research on CD

Emphasized value and engaging in such research with strategic partners

Witte (USAID)

Indicators of successful implementation

Added incentives for scientists to implement CapDev

Witte (USAID)

Recognized that CG needs to reduce the potential for CapDev to result in negative impacts

Witte (USAID); Nicholls (CABI)

Purpose of framework

Follow up/next steps: later produce more specific docs to help operationalize by CRPs and Centers

IWMI; General

Annex: Glossary Terms should be defined Witte/USAID;

General Annex: Resources

Resources for operationalizing General IWMI

Added ISNAR link Witte (USAID) PARADE link,

participatorymethods.org link Vergara (IIRR); Gibson (UNE)

Innovations in partnering and institutional relationships - ILAC

IWMI (Kai W.)

FAO CapDev link Berman (FAO) Annex: Examples of elements

Examples and more ideas for operationalizing needed

General; IWMI



Endnotes i CGIAR 2015. CGIAR Strategy and Results Framework 2016-2030. May 2015 ii Core-authoring team (in alphabetic order by organization):

• Bioversity: Per Rudebjer • Consortium Office: Alain Vidal, Nadia Manning-Thomas & Luis Solorzano • ICRAF: Mehmood Hassan • IFPRI: Suresh Babu • ILAC Javier Ekboir • ILRI: Iddo Dror & Diana Brandes • IWMI: Nicole Lefore

To provide feedback on this document, please email [email protected] iii UNDP Capacity Assessment Methodology - User’s Guide, May 2007

mailto:[email protected]

Capacity Development Framework - CGSpace Capacity... · About this document Capacity development is...

Documents

Transcript of Capacity Development Framework - CGSpace Capacity... · About this document Capacity development is...