Kenya National Policy Dialogue Summary Report 21 November 2022 ILRI Campus, Nairobi, Kenya Joshua Laichena and Elvis Kiptoo, KIPPRA, Shiluva Nkanyani and Sithembile Mwamakamba (FANRPAN), Inga Jacobs-Mata and Idil Ires (IWMI) 1 | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ................................................................................................. 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 4 1. DIALOGUE OPENING .................................................................................................................... 6 1.1 Welcome remarks by Dr Karugia from ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute)................................................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Ukama Ustawi overview by Dr. Inga Jacobs-Mata, UU lead and country representative, IWMI Southern Africa .......................................................................................... 7 1.3 Remarks by Executive Director of KIPPRA, Dr Rose Ngugi, Delivered by Joshua Laichena ................................................................................................................................................. 8 1.4 Remarks by Ms Veronica Ndetu, Ministry of Agriculture .......................................... 9 2 PRESENTATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 9 3 PANEL DISCUSSIONS .................................................................................................................. 12 3.1 Panel Discussion on Farming and Agribusiness .......................................................... 12 3.2 Panel Discussion on Policy - Moderated by Dr Romano Kiome .............................. 14 3.3 Panel Discussion on Multi-Stakeholder Platform on Climate Smart Agriculture (MSP-CSA) ............................................................................................................................................ 16 4 BREAKOUT SESSION ................................................................................................................... 17 5 KEY TAKEWAYS FROM THE WORKSHOP/POLICY DIALOGUE ................................... 18 6 DIALOGUE WRAP-UP................................................................................................................... 19 2 | P a g e The authors Joshua Laichena, The Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis Elvis Kiptoo, The Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis Shiluva Nkanyani, Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network Sithembile Mwamakamba, , Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network Inga Jacobs-Mata, International Water Management Institute Idil Ires, International Water Management Institute Acknowledgement This work was carried out under the CGIAR Initiative on Diversification in East and Southern Africa, which is grateful for the support of CGIAR Trust Fund contributors (www.cgiar.org/funders). The CGIAR Initiative on Diversification in East and Southern Africa aims to help smallholders transition to sustainably intensified, diversified, and derisked agri-food systems based on maize in 12 ESA countries. Specifically, it seeks to enable 50,000 value chain actors, including farmers (at least 40% women, 40% youth), to adopt climate-smart maize based intensification and diversification practices and one million to access digital agro-advisory services. Emphasizing the role of the private sector in driving such transformation, UU targets to support at least 30 start-ups and SMEs. For more information, contact: Dr. Idil Ires, IWMI Southern Africa, i.ires@cgiar.org Citation Laichena, J.; Kiptoo, E.; Nkanyani, S.; Mwamakamba, S.; Jacobs-Mata, I.; Ires, I. 2022. Kenya National Policy Dialogue summary report. Summary report of the National Policy Dialogue, Nairobi, Kenya, 21 November 2022. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Initiative on Diversification in East and Southern Africa. 20p. Disclaimer: This publication has been prepared as an output of the CGIAR Initiative on Diversification in East and Southern Africa, and has not been independently peer-reviewed. Responsibility for editing, proofreading, and layout, opinions expressed and any possible errors lies with the author and not the institutions involved. http://www.cgiar.org/funders https://www.cgiar.org/initiative/21-ukama-ustawi-u2-water-secure-and-climate-resilient-agricultural-livelihoods-in-east-and-southern-africa/ 3 | P a g e ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ACF Agriculture Consultative Forum AFC Agricultural Finance Corporation AfCFTA African Continental Free Trade Area AFNEED African Farmer Needs at Farm Level Initiative AICCRA Accelerating the Impact of CGIAR Climate Research for Africa ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa CCA Climate Change Act CCARDESA Centre for Coordination of Agricultural Research and Development for Southern Africa CEMIRIDE Centre for Minority Rights Development CIAT International Center for Tropical Agriculture CIDP Country Integrated Development Plan CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa CSA Climate Smart Agriculture EAC East Africa Community ESA East and Southern Africa FANRPAN Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network GDP Gross Domestic Product IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute IICD International Center for Tropical Agriculture IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture ILRI International Livestock Research Institute IWMI International Water Management Institute KARI Kenya Agricultural Research Institute KENAFF Kenya National Farmers' Federation KEPSA Kenya Private Sector Alliance KIPPRA Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis MSP Multi Stakeholder Platform NCCAP National Climate Change Action Plan NHI Node Hosting Institution NPD National Policy Dialogues PABRA Pan-Africa Bean Research Alliance PS Permanent Secretary PWD Persons With Disability SADC Southern African Development Community SIMLESA Sustainable Intensification of Maize-Legume Systems for Food Security in Eastern and Southern Africa SOCAA Society of Crop Agribusiness Advisors of Kenya TAAT Technologies for African Agricultural Transformation UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UU Ukama Ustawi VAT Value-Added Tax WP4 Work Package 4 WWF World Wildlife Fund 4 | P a g e EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Climate change has affected the environment and ecosystems affecting human habitats and jeopardizes life and livelihoods primarily by impacting agriculture in East and Southern Africa. Global temperatures have increased by 1.1 degree Celsius in the last 140 years and unpredictable weather and rainfall patterns have greatly affected maize production in Kenya. As a result, the GDP of the country has been affected given that the Kenyan population is largely dependent on maize production. The primary staple food for most Kenyans households is maize, accounting for 36 percent of all calories and 65 percent of staple food calories consumed. It is the most valued cereal crop in Kenya, and it is an indispensable crop that plays a pivotal role in the food system. It also contributes significantly to income generation for rural households. It is a key ingredient in animal feeds, and it accounts for over 80 percent of feed rations. Studies show that maize yields per hectare were lower in 2014 than in 1994. Between 1990/92 and 2014/16, Kenya was one of the few countries in Africa to experience an overall decline in maize yields. In late 2021, the government confirmed an estimated yield drop of 30% due to erratic rainfall. Having a harvest average of 1.6 tons per hectare, Kenyan maize production substantially lags behind its neighbours, such as Ethiopia and Tanzania, that are producing double and even quadruple as much. Critics argue that market failure is a problem that the government does not effectively address the issue: food does not move from surplus regions to deficit regions. While surplus producers struggle to find buyers, buyers in deficit areas lack access and traders lack incentives to move maize. Even when Kenya had a bumper maize harvest in 2019, hunger remained a life-threatening condition in arid and famine- prone areas. It is crucial that Kenya increase its maize productivity through sustainable intensification without putting scarce natural resources under pressure. An improved enabling environment may reduce the country’s import dependence on maize and benefit exports, as other agricultural sub-sectors like horticulture record growth and present diversification and trade opportunities. These steps are essential to making Kenya a prosperous middle-income nation as underlined by its Vision 2030 objectives. To address the knowledge and coordination gaps related to these problems and foster an enabling policy and investment environment, the Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN), together with the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), and the local partner, the Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA) hosted the Kenya National Policy Dialogue at ILRI in Nairobi on 21 November 2022. The dialogue is part of the CGIAR initiative: Diversification and Intensification in East and Southern Africa, launched by CGIAR in November 2022. The UU initiative seeks to address food and nutrition security challenges arising from intensive reliance on maize, in a climate-resilient, water-secure, and socially inclusive way. UU operates in 12 ESA countries: Eswatini, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. It seeks to enable 50,000 value chain actors, including farmers (40 percent women, 40 percent youth), to adopt climate-smart maize-based intensification and diversification and benefit one million people through access to digital agro-advisory services. Emphasizing the role of the private sector in driving such transformation, UU aims to support at least 30 start-ups and SMEs. This initiative will run for three years until 2025, with a potential extension until 2030. Insight gathered from the Dialogue has been incorporated into advisory notes, to be presented to the Kenyan government and the general public. Moreover, insights discussed at the Dialogue will be communicated to the ESA Policy Hub, where the initiative partners CCARDESA and ASARECA can also help to scale innovative solutions to the region to address food and income security challenges. 5 | P a g e The moderator for the day, Dr. Joseph Karugia of ILRI, welcomed members to the Dialogue and outlined the objectives of the event, identifying practical solutions to issues hampering maize production, diversification, agribusiness, and agriculture in general. He outlined the programme of the day and acknowledged CGIAR for providing valuable partnership knowledge and proposed roadmaps for transformative action in agriculture. Dr. Inga Jacobs-Mata, the UU lead and country representative for IWMI Southern Africa, elaborated on the theme of the event and showed a short, informative video on the Ukama Ustawi initiative, which outlined diversification for resilient agrifood systems in East and Southern Africa. She explained the Ukama Ustawi name (meaning “wellbeing”), in the context of helping ESA countries achieve climate- resilient agriculture. She explained the connection of UU and other new projects and initiatives and how they relate to each other at a regional level through One CGIAR. Joshua Laichena read the remarks from the Executive Director stating that agriculture is an important sector in the region and contributes significantly to the national GDPs of African economies. It also employs the majority of the population. He noted that small farmers, especially women, play a significant role in producing food in East and Southern Africa, yet they seemed to benefit the least in the agriculture value chains. The issue of shocks such as climate change and, recently, the COVID-19 pandemic, are compounding the challenges faced by smallholder farmers in the region. He said there are provisions in continental, regional and national policies to protect smallholder farmers, but very few of these provisions have actually taken effect. The keynote speaker from the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, Madam Veronica Ndetu, remarked that agriculture in Kenya is vitally reliant on good rainfall and sorely affected by climate change shocks which, in turn, affect food security and the economy. She stressed the need for concerted efforts to address the effects of climate change. Joshua Laichena From KIPPRA gave an overview of Kenyan policy in this regard. He recommended that policymakers create market driven strategies that target growth. In alignment with the Food Policy Strategy objective of zero food insecurity by 2030, the value chain focus should shift towards processing and retail, and modernising farm production. Dr. Idil Ires of IWMI explained that the National Policy Dialogues was one four major thrusts of the UU project and is currently the most active component. Its objective is to understand the status quo, and the strengths and weaknesses in the enabling environment to foster sustainable crop diversification, agribusiness, and trade in ESA. A panel discussion on farming and Agribusiness included representatives from KENAFF, AFNEED, Pan African Agribusiness Consortium and the University of Nairobi. This was followed by a presentation of the Dialogue’s policy panel that was moderated by Dr. Romano Kiome, a policy specialist at ILRI. He was convinced that the Dialogue would come up with practical solutions to improve food systems. He stressed that climate change ‘is here to stay’ and can only be dealt with by embracing digital technology to adapt to its effects. Dr Catherine Mwongera proposed that there is need to develop a metric, or unit of measurement, for the impact of climate change. The ability to measure the impact of climate change can correctly evaluate loss and damage for the Loss and Damage Fund and will also help to assess appropriate mitigation mechanisms. Ms Lydia Muthoni advised that authorities should leverage the data analytics to inform appropriate decisions in agriculture, thereby ensuring proper planning and forecasting. Later in the day a breakout session was held to discuss policy priorities that the UU initiative, CGIAR and partners should focus on in Kenya. 6 | P a g e Group discussions were finally followed by closing remarks by the Dialogue conveners. Overall, the dialogue brought a diverse group of stakeholders together (online and offline), including researchers, private sector representatives, civil society organisations, government agencies, donors, and the media to discuss how Kenya’s agricultural and economic policies, strategies, and programmes could be better designated to enable diversification for resilient agri-food systems. 1. DIALOGUE OPENING The dialogue was divided into four sessions (opening session and remarks, presentation, policy panel and group discussion). The moderator, Dr. Joseph Karugia from ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute), who was also the host of the Policy Dialogue, started off proceedings by inviting opening remarks from the speakers. 1.1 Welcome remarks by Dr Karugia from ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute) Dr. Joseph Karugia, ILRI, opened the Dialogue by inviting all the participants to engage and participate fully in the meeting. He explained that there are 16 CGIAR initiatives being implemented in Kenya and underscored the need for a collaborative effort for agricultural transformation. He encouraged Dialogue participants to embrace climate-smart agriculture innovations to attain food and nutrition security in Kenya. He welcomed the UU initiative as it would complement the government’s efforts to mitigate problems that affect smallholder farmers in the agriculture sector. These challenges include increasing energy and food prices, which are a daunting challenge for many Kenyans, and the effects of the shocks emanating from the Russian–Ukraine conflict. Dr. Karugia added that the new administration was looking for new ideas, especially those that address the issues of agro-processing, lowering food prices, improving food systems, adapting to climate change, advances in biotechnology, diversification, tradeoffs at farming system levels, healthier diets and better risk management. He noted that the majority of the farmers in Kenya were growing maize on unsuitable ground that leads to lower yields. He said that the Consultative Group on International Agriculture Research (CGIAR) recognises the importance of collaborative efforts for agricultural transformation, especially considering climate change effects and consequences. He outlined the objectives of the dialogues as follows: i. Introduce Ukama Ustawi (UU) to a broad stakeholder community in Kenya ii. Discuss Kenya’s policy priorities as they relate to the UU project iii. Present Ukama Ustawi WP4 Policy activities relevant to implementation in Kenya iv. Validate the county policy scan report conducted by FANRPAN/KIPPRA v. Clarify the policy hub roadmap and implementation in Kenya The moderator posed these questions for the audience to ponder: • What is optimal diversification? • What are the trade-offs if we diversify? 7 | P a g e 1.2 Ukama Ustawi overview by Dr. Inga Jacobs-Mata, UU lead and country representative, IWMI Southern Africa The moderator introduced Dr. Inga Jacobs-Mata, the UU lead and country representative for IWMI Southern Africa. Dr. Jacobs-Mata thanked KIPPRA for organising the Dialogue. She presented an overview of the initiative. She then emphasized that the next decade is critical for strengthening the food, land, and water systems as well as collaborating on climate change adaptation in the ESA region. The agribusiness ecosystem in the region can serve as a critical engine. It can also foster gender and youth empowerment in agriculture. ESA is a climate hotspot where the effects of erratic rainfall, frequent drought and the manifestation of pests and diseases are experienced periodically in crops, hence the involvement of CGIAR in the region. She mentioned that in years of partnership with CGIAR and other partners, there has been no shortage of innovations, technologies, products and services, but the most important current issue is how to scale up on inclusivity and coordination. The role of Ukama Ustawi (meaning “wellbeing”) in this context is to support 12 ESA countries in achieving climate-resilient agriculture and livelihoods. It seeks to help millions of smallholders intensify and diversify farming through improved input supply, farming and extension services, private sector development, and investment. Its work is divided into six interconnected work packages which focus on sustainably diversifying and intensifying maize production, assessing needs for introducing crops, livestock, mechanisation, and irrigation; applying innovations in farming, markets, nutritious diets; and building capacity and scaling up training and research for development. She used the analogy of the Big Five African animals to explain regional interventions to address food system development challenges in ESA. The elephant demonstrated diversification of maize-mixed systems for nutrition and resilience through mechanisation, irrigation and improved varieties (building on SIMLESA, PABRA, Africa RISING initiatives, complementary to SI-MFS & EiA). The lion was used to demonstrate bundled agricultural risk management and agro-advisory services (building on CCAFS; complementary to ClimBeR, LCSR and DX; with the Mercy Corps AgriFin Sprout Platform). The rhino demonstrated value chain support and inclusive agribusiness acceleration (building on AICCRA; complementary to Rethinking Markets, Shift, RAqFS; with Sus Fin team, Briter Bridges, Nourishing Africa and Bongo Hive). The leopard demonstrated the Scaling Hub, advancing “the science of scaling” and “practice of scaling” (building on IPSR; complementary to all initiatives; with GIZ Scaling Task Force; PABRA, SIMLESA; MC AgriFin; TAAT). She concluded her presentation by saying there is no need to duplicate or reinvent the wheel, but rather how stakeholders can scale up the region on the strength of this initiative. 8 | P a g e 1.3 Remarks by Executive Director of KIPPRA, Dr Rose Ngugi, Delivered by Joshua Laichena Dr Ngugi welcomed the participants to the National Policy Dialogue and the launch of the Ukama Ustawi (UU) initiative: Diversification for Resilient Agrifood Systems in East and Southern Africa. She asserted that agriculture was an important sector in the region and contributed significantly to the national GDPs of African economies, employing the majority of the population. She noted that small farmers, especially women, play a significant role in producing food in the region, yet they seemed to benefit the least in agriculture value chains. Dr Ngugi explained KIPPRA’s association with the Food, Agriculture and National Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN), which is an all-inclusive multi-stakeholder pan-African network that provides independent evidence to inform and influence policy processes at national and regional levels. FANRPAN is a multi-tiered network consisting of a regional secretariat and established national nodes currently in 18 African countries and still growing. The network’s membership includes food, agriculture and natural resource related government departments, parliamentarians, researchers and farmer organisations, the private sector, civil society organisations and the media. FANRPAN works in member countries through national nodes which consist of a multi-stakeholder national steering committee that has state and non-state representation. A local institution is selected for its focus, competence and convening power, to serve as the national Node Hosting Institution (NHI). As such, KIPPRA serves as the national node for FANRPAN in Kenya. They have been working together since July 2011. The Ukama Ustawi project is a collaborative effort with FANRPAN, with the common goal of promoting the agriculture sector in Kenya and the other countries where the project is being implemented. This National Policy Dialogue in Kenya was hosted by KIPPRA and FANRPAN. The UU initiative is a CGIAR regionally integrated enterprise led by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), in collaboration with regional and national partners, including KIPPRA and FANRPAN. Dr Ngugi said the Dialogue can play an important part in putting the country on the right track, with guiding policies able to transform agrifood systems. She also intended to disseminate and validate findings of a stakeholder and policy mapping exercise on the status of Kenya’s agriculture and food systems-related policies; and to discuss pressing issues relating to agrifood systems, diversification, and resilience-building. She said the Policy Dialogue brought together key stakeholders from the government, research community, civil society organisations, the private sector, farmers’ organisations, youth and women’s organisations and the media, to prioritise specific opportunities for collaboration and joint work on sustainable intensification and diversification. The programme was designed to capture stakeholders’ views and responses on key policy issues. The Policy Dialogue deliberations would also be recorded in the form of a report, and a policy advisory note would be submitted to the Cabinet Secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development. She thanked cooperating partners and sponsors for committing to make the Dialogue a success. She stressed that the outcomes of the Dialogue would augment Kenya’s efforts to develop vital agricultural plans and strategies. 9 | P a g e 1.4 Remarks by Ms Veronica Ndetu, Ministry of Agriculture Ms Veronica Ndetu noted that irregular rainfall patterns have affected agriculture in Kenya, thus impacting livelihoods – many Kenyans are experiencing high levels of food insecurity. She asserted that Kenya has robust climate change policies in terms of delivering development and building resilience, as well as ensuring the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Many policies such as the National Climate Response Strategy, National Climate Change Action Plan, National Climate Change Framework Policy, Kenya NDC and others are in place. The policies do not only focus on agriculture, but also guide other sectors on issues of climate change. Kenya is aligned with the global climate change adaptation agenda and agreements to address climate change. There are sector specific climate change adaptation strategies such as the Kenya CSA Strategy and Kenya CSA Implementation Framework that considers value chains, increased productivity, and creating resilience to bolster food systems without exacerbating climate change. Also, it looks at coordination among government ministries and relevant stakeholders. She said policy implementation is guided by a climate-smart agriculture implementation framework through a value-chain approach. Ms. Ndetu outlined the objectives as aligned with MSP, CSA of Kenya as follows: i. To implement intensification and diversification by furthering and increasing productivity, while also protecting the environment. ii. To closely examine current policies, institutional arrangements, and coordination among directorates related to climate change action. iii. To identify and defeat the barriers to policy implementation. 2 PRESENTATIONS This session was moderated by Dr. Greenwell Matchaya, IWMI. He invited three panelists to give their impressions of the policy landscape in Kenya and CGIAR’S approach. The panelists were from KIPPRA, IWMI and IFPRI respectively. He called for an interactive session where the other participants would provide inputs and ask questions in relation to the presentations that would be made. Mr Joshua Laichena, a senior policy analyst at KIPPRA began by acknowledging that through the UU project, a policy scan relating to agriculture was conducted in Kenya. He pointed out that over the past five years, agriculture, livestock and fishing contributed to an average of 21.4% of the economy’s GDP. In the scope of this work, great emphasis was laid on two themes that are in alignment with UU’s objectives. The first being sustainable crop identification and diversification to increase food security, making farmers climate resilient for better livelihoods, ensure nutritional security and generate job creation. He affirmed that there are several policies supporting this theme, including the Agriculture Sector Transformation and Growth Strategy, Kenya Climate Smart Agriculture Strategy, 2016, National Land Use Policy, and National Food and Nutrition Security Policy, among others. However, there are several challenges hindering the implementation of these policies and the ultimate achievement of the desired goals. These challenges include inadequate human capacity and resources. The second theme centres on agribusiness, value chain development and trade development, which involves the entire cycle from providing inputs to the farmers, providing agronomic information, processing and packaging and providing infrastructure for storing perishable commodities, and the distribution of products to the final market. He explained that high value chains contribute to three elements of food security: access, availability and quality through increasing production volumes, farm diversification, generating higher incomes, reducing post-harvest losses, and upgrading technologies. 10 | P a g e He added that there are many policies supporting this theme including the Agriculture Sector Transformation and Growth Strategy, Youth Agribusiness Strategy, National Agribusiness Strategy, and Science, Technology and Innovation Policy and Strategy, 2018-2022, among others. Mr Laichena remarked that despite the availability of these policies which focus on resilience, research innovation and sustainable agriculture, much needs to be done on implementation and execution of these policies. Most of the policies are inadequately implemented. Others are not adequately aligned to respond to emerging shocks. In addition, changes in regimes affect the continuity of the implementation of policies. He recommended that policymakers should create market driven strategies that target growth. For instance, the focus of value chains should shift towards processing and retail and modernising farm production. Other recommendations include managing agriculture transformation across national and country level, mobilising more resources from development partners and the private sector and, importantly, building a highly capable workforce of change makers. Dr. Idil Ires of IWMI gave some insight on the concept and operational framework of the National Policy Dialogues (NPDs) to offer a starting point for discussion on Institutional and Policy Bottlenecks in Agribusiness and Trade in Kenya. She said the NPDs were one of four major activities in the UU project and is currently the most active component. The objective is to understand the status quo, the strengths and weaknesses in the enabling environment to foster sustainable crop diversification, agribusiness, and trade in ESA. This would be achieved by informing and supporting policy decisions based on the perspectives of stakeholders that are affected by the outcomes of those decisions. She noted that the Dialogue will take place in 12 countries in ESA. The operational framework begins with a pre-research phase whereby the underlying policy and institutional strengths and weaknesses are identified in those countries. This is followed by the actual Dialogue with policy stakeholders which entails elaboration on key issues raised during the Dialogues and prioritising the areas that need policy and investment interventions. She emphasized that after the Dialogue, a lot must be done in terms of policy research, interdisciplinary collaboration with WP4 members and partners such as IFPRI, who are currently working on impact modelling. Various outputs are produced after the Dialogue including reports, blog pieces, policy briefs and validation meetings are also conducted with various ministries. The validated recommendations are then mainstreamed into policies. These contribute to the overall UU impact statement: climate-resilient agricultural production and livelihoods, food security, and poverty alleviation. Dr. Idil noted that conducting these Dialogues involves partnership with various organisations at international, national and regional levels, as well as the private sector. These include CGIAR- internal organisations, FANRPAN, KIPPRA, government ministries, AKADEMIYA 2063, ASARECA, CCARDESA, and funders and innovators for whom WP4 provides policy assistance. In Kenya, maize is a staple food accounting for 65% of household calories consumed. It covers 40 % of cropland. In addition, it’s cultivated mainly by smallholder farmers and is thus a major source of income for populations in rural areas. As such, sustaining and increasing maize production is crucial for food security, rural prosperity, and self-reliance in staple food. However, maize production has been declining due to climate change impacts and major institutional and policy bottlenecks making Kenya the biggest maize importer in the region. These bottlenecks include lack of information regarding climate change impact and weather forecasting systems at farm level, as well as inadequate information about green technologies. In addition, in the agribusiness and value chain development context, she noted market failure as a key issue as markets cannot efficiently regulate maize trade from surplus to deficit areas. Another bottleneck is inadequate compliance and weak enforcement of laws across multiple sectors; particularly enforcement of 11 | P a g e environmental regulations. She also said integrating natural capital into economic growth poses a challenge in transitioning to a green economy as prices and policy regimes do not fully account for the external costs associated with environmentally friendly technologies, products and practices. Dr Ires said that based on the objectives of the Policy Dialogues and the preliminary issues identified, the CGIAR seeks to achieve three objectives from discussions with the stakeholders present. Firstly, assessing the status quo: i) what are the persisting institutional and policy barriers that smallholders and agribusinesses encounter in climate-resilient production, productivity increase and trade? ii) which policies have recently been enacted to address them and which are underway? Secondly, discuss what potential policy and institutional solutions could be implemented and how realistic these solutions could be based on past experiences and, finally, cover what CGIAR and their partners could do to support the government and other organisations to scale these solutions to the regional level (ESA). The third presenter, Dr. Clemens Breisinger, programme leader and senior research fellow at IFPRI, provided some insight in the National Policies and Strategies for Food, Land, and Water Systems Transformation Initiative. He explained that National Policies and Strategies (NPS) is a country level and demand driven policy initiative with three objectives. The first objective is building policy coherence in two dimensions i) coherence across CGIAR initiatives that work in policy space and ii) working with national partners to build coherence among ministries at national and subnational level. The second objective is integrating policy tools i.e., innovative tools, economic modelling, microsimulation, and political economy. The last objective is responding to policy demand in crisis. He disclosed that the most important feature of the initiative is that they are embedded in the country and working closely with local partners to share capacity in a sustainable way and to rapidly respond to any policy questions or crisis. He gave examples of the work that the initiative has done in Kenya in relation to the objectives stated. Firstly, in the integration of policy tools context, the initiative has worked with KIPPRA in the development of economy-wide tools, household microsimulation tools and country level investment tools. These tools can be employed by KIPPRA and others to inform policy making in Kenya. NPS seeks to achieve institutionalisation of these tools and creation of model units within a period of three years. This will be achieved through holding workshops and training of trainers, co-creation of databases, co-creation of policy research and joint publications, events, and policy engagements. Dr. Clemens added that they work with local partners on the global food commodity crisis triggered by the Russia-Ukraine war which took a 4-step approach. To begin with, a rapid response team of key experts in food policy and crisis was created. Secondly, a blog was quickly published, and bi-lateral meetings held with partners from the ministries to share information on the expected impact of the crisis in terms of poverty, nutrition, and food security. The third step involved a NPS Kenya seminar series where CGIAR work would be collected and discussions on advanced analysis with policymakers and other stakeholders held in terms of building coherence. For instance, a seminar was held at KIPPRA to disseminate findings from the dialogues. The final step involved publishing the findings. In introducing the second working example, he informed participants that having a new government in Kenya presented the best time to introduce new research ideas. As such, a team of 50 people from different institutions across Kenya were invited to write a book and each institution was given a specific topic to research. Thereafter, a policy brief was developed which is yet to be published. He drew several recommendations from the policy brief which include i) broadening the strategic and policy focus from a ‘food security’ to a ‘food systems’ approach to support the economic transformation envisioned by Kenya’s Bottom-up Economic Transformation Agenda, 2022, ii) accelerating the industrialisation and commercialisation of the food system, iii) expanding access to food system activities for smallholders, iv) building on Kenya’s digital success to transform food systems, v) improving nutrition through production and consumption policies vi) providing better opportunities for women to make food 12 | P a g e systems more productive, vii) improving animal health and disease control, viii) allocating appropriate levels of domestic funding ix) building policy coherence by aligning policies across the food system and x) strengthening the science-policy interface for more effective, evidence-based policies. As the third example he cited an upcoming NPS seminar to be held in Kenya. It involves taking some of the building blocks that the new government has and working with KIPPRA to evaluate the impact of implementation of this economic plan. This will be done through employing the economic models that have been co-created and establish the likely impact on economic growth, poverty, food systems, nutrition, and employment creation if the plan was fully adopted. He called for collaboration and participation from all stakeholders in the seminars. 3 PANEL DISCUSSIONS 3.1 Panel Discussion on Farming and Agribusiness This plenary was moderated by Dr. Inga Jacobs. She stated very clearly that she needed insight from people who are directly engaged with farmers; what are the issues on the ground at the farmer’s level regarding agribusiness, also considering trade and diversification perspectives as it relates to policy. In relation to this aspect the panelists were asked to discuss issues of crop diversification, a value chain development approach and trade in Kenya. These actors’ responses to the discussion question were as follows: Dr. Daniel M. M’ Mailutha, CEO OF Kenya National Farmers’ Federation (KENAFF) How has climate change affected farmers? Climate change has had a severe impact on farmers, ranging from loss of livestock to suffering hunger and starvation. Livestock are at risk, both directly from heat and indirectly from the reduced quality of their food supply. Climate change disrupts food availability, reduces access to food, and affects food quality. Water required for food production becomes more scarce due to increased crop water use and drought. Competition for land increases as certain areas become climatically unsuitable for production. However, investments in irrigation can increase the likelihood that farmers maintain yields even when the weather is unfavourable. What is holding back farmers in agribusiness? Policy incoherence and lack of implementation is a serious issue affecting farmers. When a new government comes into power, existing policies are not always implemented. Farm input is also an issue affecting farmers e.g., increase in fertilizer prices make farmers plant without fertilizer, resulting in lower yields. Moreover, many farmers are not able to access certified seeds. Due to a lack of technical advice and extension services, farmers do not understand what CSA climate- smart agriculture entails, so inadequate information and/or training means they cannot implement beneficial CSA practices – especially at the grassroots level. Also, despite a lot of research being done, farmers have little access to that information – there is often a disconnect between research institutions and farmers. Farmers experience a lack of information regarding where to take their produce, or where to find the best prices. More accessible and/or coherent means of information dissemination to farmers is required. Trade barriers in counties: the existence of CESS levies in counties limits movements of goods from one county to another and farmers cannot get their produce to the market. 13 | P a g e What is the importance of improved technology in agribusiness? Technological innovations have greatly shaped agriculture throughout time. Adoption of improved agricultural technologies has been associated with higher earnings and a reduction in rural poverty among farm households. Innovations such as biotechnology and genetic engineering have resulted in pest resistance and increased crop yields. Resilient crops have been developed through technology. Cooperatives can be used as a pathway to address the issue of the adoption of technology and the creation of employment. Grace Gitu, Founder and Managing Director of the African Farmer Needs at Farm Level Initiative (AFNEED) How has climate change impacted farmers? Climate change has affected farmers in a devastating way. Drought poses a big threat to water and pasture and reduces the amount of quality forage available to grazing livestock. Changes in extreme weather events, and reductions in water availability result in reduced agricultural productivity. Food may become more expensive as climate change mitigation efforts increase energy prices. Food loss and lack of markets also contribute to the many challenges faced by farmers. Climate change alters the evolution and movement of pests and diseases and can weaken the defenses of crops and livestock. How to involve youth in Agriculture as a way of job creation Agriculture provides the single most important platform for employment, income generation and food security and can drive poverty reduction through increased productivity and value addition. The agriculture sector holds great potential in providing job opportunities for African youth. As the economic mainstay of most countries, it can sufficiently employ the growing majority of unemployed young people as skilled and semi-skilled labour. New investments are needed to stimulate access to innovations that could encourage African youth now turning away from agriculture to reconsider opportunities in the sector—especially given the need to generate jobs. Training youth and participating in financial literacy, credit management and business planning. Also, supporting youth groups to access commercial finance to sustain and expand their businesses will be a key issue going forward. Package the CSA practices in a way that they are attractive to the youth and make the agricultural sector a more innovative and profitable venture. What should we scale up: large-scale farming or small-scale farming? Small-scale farming should be scaled up because they produce 80% of what we consume. Small-scale farming promotes sustainable agricultural practices and sustained food security by using sustainable agricultural practices e.g., mulching and application of organic manure, which increases average crop yields. They grow a wider variety of crops than large farmers, contributing to agro-biodiversity. Large- scale farmers have a ready-defined market for their produce compared to small-scale farmers who do not always have such frameworks. Role of motorcycles in the agricultural sector Motorcycles are key modes of transport used by small-scale farmers since they are cheap and they can easily access areas where cars cannot go, making them the most reliable means of transport to these farmers. They have become an important factor in the transport system in urban and rural areas. 14 | P a g e 3.2 Panel Discussion on Policy - Moderated by Dr Romano Kiome Dr Romano started the session by acknowledging the importance of the Dialogue and stated that he accepted the invitation to attend because the initiative was championing the utilisation of digitisation to solve food system problems. He was convinced that the Dialogue would stimulate practical solutions to food system problems. He emphasized that climate change ‘was here to stay’ and said it could only be dealt with by embracing digital technology to adapt to its effects. He told the audience that he was an expert on agricultural policy matters having served in the industry for more than 40 years; notably as the Director General for Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), and as Permanent Secretary (PS) in the Ministry of Agriculture. After his brief remarks he invited the panelists to the podium. Dr Catherine Mwongera, a senior scientist at Alliance of Biodiversity International, CIAT (International Center for Tropical Agriculture) reflected on the recent COP27 event in Egypt. According to her, there is a lack of clear focus on how science can be used to address food system challenges and, in fact, there was no reference to food systems in the final COP 27 document. Consequently, she said this poses several questions, like: where should our priority be? What are our agrifood systems priorities in the face of climate change? Yes, the takeaways from COP are good, but where do our priorities lie?. According to her, there has been lack of focus on how science-based evidence could impact food systems. She said that climate change was affecting livelihoods, and there is a need to look for a way to leverage science to solve its effects and lessen the damaging impact on society. She proposed an idea to develop a metric, or unit of measurement, for the impact of climate change. Being able to measure the impact of climate change can enable more accurate evaluation of loss and damage for the Loss and Damage Fund, for example, and will also help to appraise appropriate mitigation mechanisms. It could also help in negotiating for compensation from industrialised states who are a major source of polluting gases. Dr Mwongera also alluded to a report by IICD (International Institute of Communication and Development) in 2019 that compared agricultural transformation in Asia and Africa. This report highlighted various pathways which could lead to agricultural transformation. First was a pricing policies pathway: this includes market prices for produce as well as input prices for the raw materials. It also covers matters like Value-Added Tax (VAT), or taxation policies affecting prices of commodities. Secondly, the institutional reform pathway is a critical aspect touching on policies, legal frameworks and more effective institutions. The institutional frameworks provide information as well as clear guidelines for the transformation and helps in delivery of the objectives of the transformation. Thirdly, the pathway of public spending on the agriculture sector, i.e. what is the national allocation to agriculture as a sector? What activities do the funding go to? How are we able to influence budget on agriculture? According to Dr Mwongera, these are pertinent questions, the answers of which can help in the effective transformation of agriculture. She also noted that private sector funding may be a challenge, since the banking sector is still relatively underdeveloped in the region. Dr Mwongera also talked about the diversification of food systems. She asked: diversification for what, to what, how and when? She gave an example of government policy that advocated for maize flour blended with other highly nutritious cereals like casava, millet, sorghum etc. She stressed that it was a good policy and the government should have ‘run with it’. She regretted the collapse of the policy saying this was a great initiative which would have ultimately reduced pressure on maize as well winning society over to consuming other nutritious food, hence diversification of the staple food. She warned, 15 | P a g e however, that diversification should be a thoughtful process, which ultimately should determine its entry point; whether it should be approached on the pricing policy angle, or from the institutional reform point of view. Dr Mwongera also touched on the issue of complimentary efforts between different sectors like trade, finance, and infrastructure. She stressed that collaboration between critical sectors and the agriculture sector and food systems is vital. She also warned that the region was lagging in adaptation mechanisms to climate change. She advised that science should be embraced to scale up the adaptation measures. On markets, she urged for better market information services, especially on prices, tariffs and barriers to ensure farmers make decisions from a point of useful information. The next panelist was Mr Thomas Barasa, who observed that Kenya has enough policies, and the challenge has always been inadequate implementation of the policies. He also noted that productivity has decreased over the years. He wondered how it is that policies are effective in some sectors while ineffective in others. Mr Barasa noted that maize production had dwindled and attributed this to a lack of adoption of technology because it is so costly. He also pointed out that lack of proper dissemination of research to the intended consumers/beneficiaries of research was a hinderance to agriculture. He made a plea for the adoption of relevant technologies and urged researchers and policy institutions to focus on smallholder farmers as key consumers of research output. He advocated for a collective approach to ensure food security in the region. He said that a collective response by the SADC and EAC on climate change could lead to tremendous progress in the agriculture sector and greatly reduce the impact of climate change. He urged that policies should be strengthened at the regional and national level to ensure profitability for farmers, SMEs and other actors in the sector. He decried the lack of strong linkages between farmers and the market. He proposed that cross border trade should be encouraged to ensure producers are linked with markets beyond the borders. He also argued that there are a lot of opportunities across the borders and farmers need to utilise technology to take advantage of the market. He was of the view that there is a need to bring in trade experts who deal with import/export policies and regulations to help promote trade across national borders. To realise seamless trade across borders, Mr Barasa said that issues of quality standards and food safety should be addressed by harmonising safety and quality standards across countries. This will ensure food items can move without transferring diseases across borders. The speaker also said ensuring profitability of farm produce will encourage increase in production. He advised that this can be achieved through establishment of digital advisory services to advise farmers on appropriate and modern farming methods, as well as appropriate crops. He feels there should be seamless access to credit by farmers at favorable financing terms. On the question that some farmers are being exploited by middlemen, Mr Barasa urged farmers to organise themselves into groups to champion their interests. This will also go a long way in giving them a voice where they can negotiate with traders on good prices for their produce. Ms Lydia Muthoni advised that authorities should leverage data analytics to inform appropriate decisions in agriculture, to ensure proper planning and forecasting. Waceke of Agricultural Finance Corporation (AFC) informed the Dialogue that AFC still funds farmers, and farmers can approach them to be served conventionally, as the corporation serves them both digitally and in the old-fashioned way. In closing the session, Dr Romano informed the KNCCAP (Kenya National Climate Change Action Plan) that the Climate Change Act, 2016, and the book titled Impact of climate change on water resources in Africa are critical documents to help in understanding food systems in the face of climate change. He stressed that members should read them as primary documents as they were very insightful on adaptation mechanisms. He added that climate change adaptation is the only solution that will ensure food security in the midst of adverse climate events. He said climate change is a big issue that involves 16 | P a g e land use policies, infrastructure planning, settlement programmes etc, and what the UU initiative is doing now is a small but critical aspect of food systems transformation. 3.3 Panel Discussion on Multi-Stakeholder Platform on Climate Smart Agriculture (MSP-CSA) Ms Veronica Ndetu, Head of the Climate Change Unit, MSP-CSA, Ministry of Agriculture, gave some insight on the role of the Multi-Stakeholder Platform on Climate Smart Agriculture. She mentioned that the strategy identified lack of co-ordination as a key challenge that hinders effective implementation of CSA. As such, the implementation framework dedicated a component that analyses coordination and outlines ways of strengthening the collaboration of CSA actors at national and county levels and across state and non-state actors including ministries, the private sector, research, academia, and development partners. In addition, it examines the enabling policies and institutional environment for the realisation of CSA objectives. The mechanism reports the sector achievements to the national and county reporting systems as guided by the NCCAP and CCA, and scaling up of best practices in addressing climate change in the agriculture sector. She highlighted the objectives of MSP as: i. Facilitating adoption of best climate action practices, technologies, inputs and services by practitioners in the agriculture sector ii. Enhancing credibility of climate action coordination and reporting mechanisms in the agriculture sector iii. Providing an inclusive platform for stakeholders to collaborate and scale up projects on climate action iv. Influencing policy reforms for the implementation of climate action in the sector v. Safeguarding inclusion of indigenous people, women, youth and PWD. The objectives are driven by Thematic Working Groups. Later, she introduced the first panelist for the discussion: Peter Kuria (Conservation Tillage Network) spoke about Credibility in Coordination and Reporting Processes. He recommended a CSA tool that is developed to ensure MSP uses a centralised reporting system to avoid duplication and under-reporting on climate action. The tool is developed for monitoring and evaluation using guidelines that is reported on M&E frameworks. Actors are trained to ensure they can use the tool and report efficiently. The second panelist was Joab Osumba (ILRI), covering Policy Development and Implementation. Joab highlighted the devolution of climate action and cascading of climate action in the sector through policy dialogues at the county level, supporting the development of policy briefs and policy documents, convening policy dialogue forums with knowledge generators, and to provide input in public participation during climate action plans on CIDP. The third panelist was Salome Awuonda (CEMIRIDE), talking about Social Inclusivity. She said social inclusivity should go beyond aggregated data to safeguard the interest of marginalised people, indigenous people, youth and PWD to ensure they are included in climate smart agriculture strategies, to ensure they are not vulnerable to food security. She pointed out that there are gaps like national social inclusivity on climate smart agriculture and integrating indigenous, traditional solutions of knowledge for weather forecasting. She said they were working on policies to bridge the gaps that marginalise indigenous people, including working on integration frameworks, ensuring they have documentation and creating a database as a social inclusion indicator. 17 | P a g e The fourth panelist was Nancy Rapando (WWF) talking about Knowledge Sharing, Networking and Collaboration. She mentioned the importance of being well anchored within the county and national government, having connections with the private sector, the need for being well-coordinated, the need to have horizontal connection to MSP, building capacity for county actors and connecting traders to the private sector like KEPSA on issues of climate smart agriculture. The fifth panelist was Lydia Kimani (SOCAA) discussing Agribusiness and Trade. She noted that agribusinesses often operate in the informal economy, therefore it was almost impossible to conduct regular business. For a profitable business to thrive there should be a level of predictability. Also, transaction cost and policy evolution always affects agri-business. She said intervention from the policy point of view should be to leverage agribusiness MSPs like MSP-CSA to scale CSA innovations to strengthen and develop private sector capacity, injecting more critical finance, since the level of financing was at 2%, de-risking agribusiness, increasing technology, and helping agribusiness smallholders to comply with market standards, incorporating trade into MSPs, and having institutional frameworks at county level. She said there is a need to strengthen private sector and agribusiness capacities. She said it was not possible to do away with the cooperative model; she asked where the challenges were coming from, she asked how the governance system of the cooperative model can be strengthened, and she emphasized the need to become a member of MSP-CSA. 4 BREAKOUT SESSION The participants broke away into four discussion groups and brainstormed on the questions listed below. The groups then presented their deliberations to the plenary and from these deliberations common points were identified and are listed under each question. What should the policy priorities be in respect of sustainable crop intensification, diversification, agribusiness, value chain development and trade in Kenya? ✓ Agribusiness should be prioritised from micro to macro level ✓ Land use policy that supports diversification ✓ Bio diversification of inputs and products ✓ De-risking of agribusiness financing ✓ Self-regulations through business membership organisations – codes of conduct ✓ Implementation of private sector strategy on climate change solution (2022-2030) ✓ Agro-ecology- land use policy (for diversification) ✓ Bio-fortifications- policy is needed around the bio-fortification of inputs and products (to promote bio fortified seeds) Should land use be democratized? Consider the gender aspect, as well as upgrading agricultural training centres and incubators – there are many incubation and acceleration centres that need to be revamped and revitalised. 18 | P a g e ✓ Break away from operating in ‘silos’ ✓ Increase productivity in agriculture ✓ Improve nutrition, demand for healthy food e.g., bio-fortified seeds ✓ Inputs – seeds, fertilizer/ other soil management inputs and land tenure system Other significant policies, challenges and priorities not covered by panelists in these thematic fields? ✓ Political good will to drive coordination and implementation of policy ✓ Monitor food and distribution (real-time) ✓ Promote e-commerce and how to integrate it in agriculture ✓ Work on better financing and trade in the agricultural sector ✓ Support SMEs and micro businesses with incentives What lessons and potential solutions can be scaled to the regional level (East and Southern Africa) to address similar issues in the region? ✓ Connect farmers with regional markets- SADC, EAC, COMESA, African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AFCTA), etc. ✓ Access to information along various/diversified value chains ✓ Demand driven and affordable innovation ✓ Quality management standards ✓ Strengthen multi-stakeholder engagements ✓ Strengthen knowledge and information management to bridge existing gaps ✓ Eliminate institutional and policy barriers in agribusiness and develop value chains ✓ Public private partnerships should be enhanced and encouraged ✓ Deal with food waste and post-harvest losses Which government units and actors focused on agribusiness and value chain development should we engage with and collaborate? ✓ Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development ✓ Ministry of Environment and Forestry ✓ Ministry of Trade and Investment ✓ Ministry of National Treasury and Economic Planning ✓ National agriculture working groups ✓ National chambers of agribusiness and trade ✓ National youth programmes ✓ National agriculture and extension institutions ✓ National Environment Management Authority 5 KEY TAKEWAYS FROM THE WORKSHOP/POLICY DIALOGUE i. Maize intensification and diversification, agribusiness and trade can only be enhanced by climate adaptation in the face of climate change threats. 19 | P a g e ii. There are adequate policies, institutional frameworks and relevant legal frameworks, however, there is need to scale up their implementation. iii. Science-based evidence is critical in tackling the impact of climate change and should be embraced as soon as possible. iv. Need to develop a metric or unit of measurement for the impact of climate change to guide decision-making and compensation from the Damage and Loss Fund. v. Knowing how climate change has impacted developing nations will strengthen ways to mitigate climate change. vi. There is a need to address issues of pricing policies, both for produce and raw materials vii. There is a need for adequate funding for agriculture, especially from government, since banks are not sufficiently developed. viii. There is need for clear focus on diversification. We need to know, diversification for what? To what? How? And when? ix. Agriculture is cross cutting, hence requires collaboration from other sectors like finance, trade etc. x. Technology provides several opportunities for agriculture, across the value chain and food system. xi. Harmonise policies regionally like quality and safety aspects to foster and benefit cross border trade in agriculture. xii. Trade across borders holds an important key for success in agribusiness. xiii. There is adequate research, but it’s not reaching the intended beneficiary (the farmer); research findings should be disseminated and communicated more effectively. xiv. Approach agricultural issues collectively as region e.g., EAC, SADC, COMESA. xv. Engage trade experts to spur agribusiness across the countries. xvi. Set up digital and market information services to help the farmer. xvii. Use data analytics in agriculture to help in accurate forecasting and planning, as well as decision-making. xviii. More technological innovations should be used in agriculture. xix. Policy coherence and implementation of existing policies should be reviewed. xx. Enhance regional integration among countries in East and Southern Africa. xxi. There is a need to increase productivity without causing emissions. xxii. There is a need to de-risk agriculture to increase resource efficiency. xxiii. Improve coordination between policy implementers and the county governments. xxiv. Need to strengthen private sector and agribusiness capacities. xxv. We cannot do away with the cooperative model and the need to strengthen the governance system of the cooperative model. xxvi. Scientists need to simplify and speed-up the provision of policy recommendations. 6 DIALOGUE WRAP-UP Dr. Inga thanked all participants for the lively discussions. She acknowledged that the Dialogue was enlightening and informative and provided more inputs compared to the first Dialogue held in Zambia. There was more emphasis on trade and a farmer-friendly approach in implementation. She noted that as a regional initiative, UU can address issues raised to a given extent and therefore it seeks to work with stakeholders to efficiently achieve the set objectives. The issues that UU can address include cross border trade, finance, diversification policies, institutional coordination, and issues around farmer- friendly policies. She thanked regional partners including FARA, ASARECA, CCARDESSA and said they look forward to continued partnership as they moved forward to the implementation stage. Mr Laichena thanked all participants and partners including FANRPAN, IWMI, IFPRI, panelists, and the hosts, ILRI. He informed all participants that a report will be developed, reviewed and disseminated by FANRPAN. In addition, a summary of the policy issues will be developed and packaged as policy 20 | P a g e advisories to be sent to the government and other actors for action. He called for continued partnership in other dialogues and projects organised by any of the stakeholders represented. ABOUT THE ORGANISERS Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN) FANRPAN was established in 1997 in response by ministers of agriculture and environment from Southern and Eastern Africa for an independent network to promote the dissemination of policy research results across Africa, and to act as a platform for policy engagement of all food, agriculture, and natural resources (FANR) stakeholders. It is an Africa-wide network of countrybased policy nodes that are groups of existing policy institutions with technical expertise and FANR stakeholders collaborating to generate evidence for use in addressing policy bottlenecks. The national nodes are an inter-sectoral platform of different stakeholder groups, including farmers’ organisations, agriculture and policy research institutions, government departments, the private sector, civil society, donors, women, youth, and the media. For more information, please visit: www.fanrpan.org Agricultural Consultative Forum (ACF) Agricultural Consultative Forum (ACF) is a Zambian Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) that provides a stakeholder platform for agricultural policy dialogue and fostering of public-private partnerships in Zambia’s agricultural sector. ACF is an innovative private-public sector platform, that provides an opportunity for dialogue and consultation on government’s agricultural policies, strategies and programs, and other agricultural-related policy interventions or issues, in Zambia and the region and globally, in general. It contributes to information-sharing, coordination, and networking among agricultural stakeholders. ACF also monitors the implementation of government agricultural policies, strategies and programs and undertakes agricultural policy analysis and research. Over the years, our institution has contributed to the increased ownership of various policy formulation processes by stakeholders in Zambia, and the increased recognition and adoption of policy advisory notes by the Zambian government. International Water Management Institute (IWMI) The International Water Management Institute (IWMI) is an international, research-for-development organization. Headquartered in Colombo, Sri Lanka, IWMI is a CGIAR Research Center with offices in 14 countries and a global network of scientists operating in more than 30 countries. IWMI targets to help address water and land management challenges faced by poor communities in developing countries, and through this contributes towards the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of reducing poverty and hunger and maintaining a sustainable environment. Based on evidence and knowledge drawn from science, innovative technologies, and testing of business models, IWMI works with governments, farmers, water managers, development partners, and businesses to solve water problems and scale up solutions. Together with its partners, IWMI combines research with data to build and enhance knowledge, informationservices and products, strengthen capacity, convene dialogue, and deliver actionable policy analysis to support the implementation of solutions for water management. In 2012, IWMI was awarded the prestigious Stockholm Water Prize Laureate for its pioneering research, which has helped to improve agricultural water management, food security, and environmental health and alleviate poverty in developing countries. More information is available at: www.iwmi.cgiar.org CGIAR CGIAR is a global research partnership for a food-secure future. CGIAR science is dedicated to transforming food, land, and water systems in a climate crisis. Its research is carried out by 13 CGIAR Centers/Alliances in close collaboration with hundreds of partners, including national and regional research institutes, civil society organisations, academia, development organisations and the private sector. We would like to thank all funders who support this research through their contributions to the CGIAR Trust Fund: www.cgiar.org/funders. To learn more about Ukama Ustawi and other initiatives in the CGIAR research portfolio, please visit www.cgiar.org/cgiar-portfolio. http://www.fanrpan.org/ www.iwmi.cgiar.org http://www.cgiar.org/cgiar-portfolio