RTB at IITA - Background
-
Upload
international-institute-of-tropical-agriculture -
Category
Science
-
view
473 -
download
0
Transcript of RTB at IITA - Background
Figure of Pie-Chart
Humidtropics (28%)
MAIZE (10%) RTB (26%)
Grain Legumes
(10%)
A4NH (9%)
WLE (6%)
CCAFS (3%) Genebanks (1%)
PIM (7%)
W1/2 + W3/bilateral = 103 million USD
W1/2 = 24 million USD
CRP portfolio
Banana
Plantain Cassava Potato Sweetpotato Yam Other R&T
400 million farmers depend on RTB crops
Buffering role in food systems
Our Crops
Crop Expertise by Centre
CROP EXPERTISE
CENTER
BANANA
CASSAVA
POTATO
SWEETPOTATO
YAM
AROIDS
ANDEAN
Bioversity
CIAT
CIP
CIRAD
IITA
RTB 1.0 Key Features
Feature
Theme-based programme structure
Funding through: Base (Core) & Complementary Projects
Gender Mainstreaming
Results-based Management (RBM)
RTB provides umbrella for both W1/2 and W3 funding
Reporting through Google-drive based Product Portfolio
ALL IITA activities on RTBs reported to RTB
Complementary projects 2014/2015
Title
Targeted use of global genetic diversity
Describing and managing diseases causing degeneration
of planting material
Conceptual Framework for Seed Systems
BBTD containment and recovery
Management of RTB-critical pests and diseases under
changing climates,
Integrating gender in RTB thematic research
Part I (Processing) and Part II (Production): Competitive
production and processing
Gender Mainstreaming in RTB
Impact Assessment/adoption studies
RTB 1.0 to RTB 2.0
6 Flagships and 25 clusters
Outcome Orientation (RBM)
Multidisciplinary teams from different Themes
Online software platform (M&E)
Google drive
Research / output
orientation
7 RTB Themes RTB 1.0
RTB 2.0
RTB: change and reviews
• CRP Phases
– Phase 1: 2012-2016 (2015-2016 transition)
– Phase 2: 2017-2022
• Structural Change
– Moving from themes to Flagship Projects and Clusters of
Activities
• Pre-proposal
– Written and submitted in August, 2015
• Reviews
– Independent Evaluation Arrangement (IEA) (RTB)
– Science, Programs and Partnerships Committee (SPPC)
– Independent Partnership Science Council (ISPC)
RTB 2: Hierarchical Programme Structure
Cluster
Flagship
Project
1 2 3 4 5 6
RTB Program Level
Outputs – Milestones – Activities/input
Products
(daisy)
New 'system’ of yam production
base on improved varieties, seed
system, integrated crop management and value chain
alliances.
High yielding market-
demanding improved candidate
varieties for release
Production and protecction
technologies to increase
productivity of ware and seed
yam
Business plan models and value chain productive alliances models
for profitable quality seed and
ware yam production
Seed system, high ratio
propagation techniques and certification for
quality seed.
Accelerated breeding cycle
integrating, participatory
value chain and modern breeding
methods and tools
Cluster of Activities
Product ‘Daisy’
Yam Varieties
And Sustainable
Seed Systems
Definitions
Flagship Project (FP)
• Large research components that add up to make a complete CRP
• Build on constituent clusters
• Each Flagship addresses (sub)-IDOs and achieve 2 to 3 of the CGIAR
SLOs
Cluster of Activity (CoA)
• Sub-projects within each Flagship (5 to 8)
• Units for planning, reporting, monitoring and budget / managing for
results/outcomes
• Basis for organizing scientists across centers / multidisciplinary
science teams
• About size of large BMGF grant
• Specific theories of change co-constructed with specific stakeholders
Timeline for RTB Full proposal
Date Stage
17 Aug 2015 Pre-proposals shared with Consortium Board (CB),
ISPC and FC.
16 November 2015 CB invites full proposals and initiates other follow-
up
Before – 31 March 2016 Prepare and submit full CRP proposals
17 Jun – 31 Jul 2016 Centers revise proposals & share with CGIAR
System Council
10 Nov 2016 CGIAR System Council decisions on CRP
proposals
10 Nov – 10 Dec 2016 Center revisions of CGIAR System Council must-
haves, if any
10 - 20 Dec 2016 ISPC final check of CGIAR System Council must
haves
Starts 1 January 2017 A rolling 6-year program of research with
committed funding for the initial 3 years, renewable
depending on progress.
Proposed Flagship Project Leaders
Flagship Project FP Leader Centre
Discovery Clair Hershey CIAT
Varieties and Seed Elmar Schulte-Geldermann CIP
Resilient Crops James Legg IITA
Nutritious Food Simon Heck CIP
Livelihood Systems Piet van Asten IITA
Impact at Scale Elisabetta Gotor Bioversity
IEA – Review Outcomes
• Summary. Overall successful, and is delivering
results after four year
• Global comparative advantage. Strong, but
should assess role in light of growing strengths of
NARS and Private Sector
• Science Quality. Sound, but high level of output
in non Thomson journals (39%) is worrying
• 18 recommendations. Notable. Stronger cross-
centre integration in cassava & banana breeding
programmes
ISPC – Pre-proposal Review Outcomes
• RTB founded on clear comparative advantage
CGIAR
• Well conceptualised, strong and stable
management
• Pre-proposal generally very high standard
• Role of other CRPs and partner organisations
explained succinctly with great clarity
• Theory of change and impact pathway for RTB
clear, focused, logical and plausible
• Greatest concern role of FP5 and FP6
Clusters Annex 5.1 Overview, coding and short titles of FP and clusters
Flagship Projects:
DISCOVERY DELIVERY
FP1:
Enhanced genetic resources
FP2:
Productive varieties & quality seed
FP3:
Resilient crops
FP4:
Nutritious food & added value
FP5:
Integrated livelihood systems
Clusters of Activity:
DI1.1 (Breeding platform)
DI1.2 (Next generation breeding)
DI1.3 (Game changing traits)
DI1.4 (In-situ conservation)
DI1.5 (Adding value to
genebanks)
CC2.1 (Quality seeds & access to
improved varieties )
BA2.2 (User preferred banana cultivars/hybrids)
CA2.3 (Added value cassava varieties)
PO2.4 (Potato quality seed)
PO2.5 (Potato varieties for Asia)
SW2.6 (User preferred
sweetpotato varieties)
YA2.7 (Quality seed yam)
CC3.1 (Pest/disease management)
CC3.2 (Crop production systems)
BA3.3 (Banana fungal diseases/Foc)
BA3.4 (Banana viral diseases/BBTV)
BA3.5 (Banana bacterial
diseases/BXW)
CA3.6 (Cassava biological
constraints, Asia/Americas)
CA3.7 (Cassava biological threats,
Africa)
CC4.1 (Postharvest innovation &
nutrition improvement)
CA4.2 (Cassava processing)
CA4.3 (Biofortified cassava)
SW4.4 (Nutritious sweetpotato)
CC5.1 (Sustainable intensification/diversi
fication)
CC5.2 (Institutional innovations)
PB5.3 (East and Central Africa)
PB5.4 (West Africa)
PB5.5 (Central Mekong)
PB5.6 (Tropical Americas and
Caribbean)
FP 6: Impact at scale
CC6.1 (Knowledge, capacities, partnerships)
CC6.2 (Strategic gender research)
CC6.3 (Foresight, impact assessment)
Note: prefix indicates crop where relevant: DI=discovery, CC=cross cutting, BA=banana, CA=cassava, PO=potato, SW=sweetpotato, YA=yam, PB=place based.
Cross-cutting
Place based
Cross cutting
RTB Planning – Next Steps
• Reporting. Product portfolio report (all scientists),
theme reports (theme leaders), crop reports (focal
points and lead crop scientists for each centre),
complementary project reports (project leaders
and centre PIs)
• Site Integration. IITA to lead in 2 of 3 African
priority sites: Nigeria and Tanzania (all CRPs)
• Annual Meeting. CIP, Lima. December 8-10
• Phase II full proposal. Deadline – March 31
And in Conclusion
• IITA and RTB
– Is it all too much effort?
• IITA and RTB
– Funding concerns call for innovation and
aggressive pursuit of new opportunities