Vol. II RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Vol. II LIST OF ANNEXES 1. RTB PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY 1 2. RTB CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 10 3. RTB GENDER 18 4. RTB YOUTH STRATEGY 23 5. RTB RESULTS BASED MANAGEMENT 27 6. RTB LINKAGES WITH OTHER CRPS AND SITE INTEGRATION 35 7. RTB STAFFING OF MANAGEMENT TEAM & FLAGSHIP PROJECTS 78 8. RTB OPEN ACCESS MANAGEMENT 133 9. RTB INTELLECTUAL ASSETS MANAGEMENT 136 10A. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 140 10B. REFERENCES 147 10C. RTB COMMUNICATIONS AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT 158 10D. RTB ACCOUNTABILITY MATRIX 162 10E. RTB CONTRIBUTION TO THE SRF TARGET 169 10F. RTB PERFORMANCE INDICATORS MATRIX 174 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 1 ANNEX 1: RTB Partnership Strategy 1. Introduction RTB is developing a partnership strategy to guide program participants in selecting, managing, evaluating and enhancing partnerships. The program considers three main objectives in shaping its partnership arrangements: (1) positioning itself in a fast changing landscape of scientific innovation and centers of expertise, especially with respect to genetics and discovery research; (2) building on the promising efforts during RTB phase I to establish more inclusive relationships with an array of research partners including farmers organizations and other end-users for inclusive, collaborative research; and (3) engaging a wider group of development partners and private sector entities as agents of change for scaling. RTB’s approach to building partnerships is eclectic and cross-sectoral. Where technologies can be provided through markets then these objectives may be achieved primarily through private sector partners and there is encouraging progress in this regard. For the case of public goods, which are not ordinarily provided by a market mechanism, then other types of development partners come to the fore. These include international NGOs and government agencies, including large-scale public sector development projects supported by international finance agencies, and these require the use of diverse promotional approaches such extension programs, but also novel mechanisms such as plant clinics, innovation fairs and seed exchanges. ‘Partnership’ is central to international agricultural research for development precisely because collaboration mobilizes research results through bringing together diverse actors to produce development results. Frequently this involves multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSPs) which include, for example, networks, alliances and consortia. It also frequently involves clients, beneficiaries and users of technology including farm households, community groups or market agents, in research or activities designed to foster innovation. Because of the pervasive nature of partnerships they are a key part of most RTB activities and form an intrinsic part of the nested set of theories of change (ToC) which make outcomes possible, with the scale and scope of partnerships changing at each level. RTB defines partnership as “a sustained, multi-organizational relationship with mutually agreed objectives and an exchange or sharing of resources or knowledge for the purpose of generating research outputs (new knowledge or technology) or fostering innovation (use of new ideas or technology) for practical ends (Horton et al 2009)”. RTB recognizes that strong partnerships are intrinsic to achieving both research products and development outcomes. To achieve strong and enduring partnerships it is necessary to address both the structural aspects of collaboration (partnerships) as well as the interactive, process dimension (partnering). RTB program participants enter into many diverse partnering arrangements with varying levels of formality and for multiple purposes. In most cases the partnerships are entered into by program participants under a general RTB umbrella (and recorded in an inventory) following principles of subsidiarity where the program participants directly manage the partnership relationships. A sub-set of these partnering arrangements involve RTB more directly as a higher level actor. Partnerships in RTB are both formal, often mediated by a contractual agreement such as the Program Partnership Agreement, but also informal where no written contract exists. The inventory of partnerships, which includes both types and specification of roles and expectations, is useful for partnership monitoring and evaluation purposes and analysis potentially linked with scaling supported by Flagship Project 5. 1 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 1 2. Roles and partnership modes Partners play diverse roles along the impact pathway framed by the three general objectives mentioned previously: 1. Positioning for discovery research. Partnerships with advanced research institutes play a critical role for centers to access cutting edge research capacity, technology and tools. 2. Ground-truthing technologies through collaborative, inclusive research. National research institutes are often next users of RTB developed technology and tools and stronger institutes often are involved in co-developing and co-disseminating technology. Capacity development plays a critical role in strengthening these partners and expanding their capability to use more advanced tools and methods as well as to strengthen their inclusive and collaborative approach to technology testing. 3. Engaging partners for scaling. RTB centers engage and influence a broad array of development partners including NGOs, extension offices and national agricultural development programs which adapt, disseminate and promote technology, to achieve impact at scale. Another route to achieving impact at scale is by engaging market actors through public private partnerships who provide varieties, seed and other inputs along value chains; here profit and the entry of new business drives scaling. RTB has extensive experience with the Participatory Market Chain Approach which guides partner selection for inclusive value chain development with private sector partners playing a key driving role (Devaux et al 2011). This approach has been further elaborated more recently to strengthen the entrepreneurial capacities of producers (DA-CHARM2 and CIP-FoodSTARTm 2014a and 2014b). Still other types of partners may be involved in the policy area including advocacy agents to create a more enabling environment for scaling to occur. The particular set of partners having the differing roles described above changes over time, creating a dynamic of partner selection, consolidation and growth, as well as sometimes transition and exit. A wide diversity of such partners and roles is described in the flagship project descriptions. Increasingly, however, partners come together in MSPs. A selection of these is presented for RTB in table 1 following the ISPC (in development) typology of distinct Innovation and Partnership Modes: Mode 1: Agricultural research partnerships. Includes research consortia. Priorities are framed by public policy imperatives or by private industry sponsored funding. Mode 2: Agricultural innovation delivery partnerships. Includes partnerships, platforms and alliances with the private sector, NGOs and farmer groups create value for farm households and companies. Priorities are framed by the convergence of three factors: technology push from research, demand pull from farmers and markets, and by public policy imperatives. Mode 3: National Agri-food systems innovation partnerships. Relates to inter-linked farm-to-policy multi-stakeholder processes and partnerships to action changes in food systems that create social and economic value. Priorities framed by negotiation between public and private sectors and articulated in national development plans and policies. Mode 4: Global development innovation partnerships. These are global architectures of MSP platforms which create coherence between global and local agendas and implementation strategies and action that brings about systems adaptation. Priorities framed by global negotiation and agreement in the SDG’s aligned with national development plans and policies. AFS-CRPs such as RTB which bring together the centers with a wide array of other partners to create change in food systems belong to mode 3. GI-CRPs which create coherence between global and local 2 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 1 agendas belong to mode 4. Hence with the development of the CGIAR portfolio relationships with particular partners may be mediated through their linkages to CRPs. 3. Building and sustaining partnerships RTB partnership strategy recognizes that successful established partnerships will require the following (Horton et al 2009a): • A common vision and purpose (whilst recognizing the existence of distinct goals and purposes of participating organizations). • Realistically defined goals. • Legitimacy and support for the partnership by parent organizations. • Equitable sharing of resources, responsibilities, and benefits. • Transparent governance and decision-making. • The creation and re-creation of trust. • Learning and capacity development. Hence the RTB partnership strategy recognizes a series of steps: 1. Partnership scan: a scan of existing MSPs and other types of partners to identify commonalities and gain synergies. This exercise would also characterize the partner context landscape to identify partners with a common vision, potentially shared goals and complementary competencies and scope. 2. Articulation of the partnership mechanism: Establish the type of agreement required by partners. This may include contract /grant based or complementary agreements with shared resources, risks and responsibilities. An inventory of these agreements is established and used in M&E. 3. Partner-based implementation: monitoring the process in terms of agreed principles of transparency, communication, equity and trust. 4. Partner reflection: internal to the specific activity but also external costs and especially benefits in terms of strengthened capacity and increased influence. 5. Partnership transition: “Moving forward” or “moving on” expand the scale and scope of the partnership or looking to transition and exit plan for the partnership. 4. Research on partnerships and M&E RTB has actively supported partnership research to generate evidence about what works in partnership practice. This includes the use of social network analysis to monitor partnerships among program participants and with other organizations (ILAC 2009). Partners in the four regional banana networks (www.banana-networks.org) facilitated by Bioversity since the 1980s with active participation from IITA, CIRAD and CIAT were surveyed using a framework based on the vibrancy, connectivity and effects of networking in 2013. Results showed that the networks had been effective in raising the awareness of the banana development potential, generating new linkages across country boundaries and building and providing access to new knowledge and tools for the study of banana genetic diversity and pest and pathogen management. Areas for strengthening included the projection of networking content beyond the network representative in each country, diversification of stakeholder types linked by networks and 3 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 1 the expansion of electronic networking. Monitoring the composition and evolution of the research networks of the CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) will continue and be documented as case studies. Specialized tools will be developed to support partnership M&E. For example, RTB researchers have developed the “Partnership Health Check List” to encourage early and open communication on the partnership processes within the project, o that any concerns can be identified and addressed appropriately. This covers the main factors which contribute to successful partnerships: a common vision, understanding the roles of each partner, information flows, communication practices, and conflict resolution practices (Horton et al 2009).1 The tool uses a simple Likert Scale for respondents to score their satisfaction with different processes within the partnership. Respondents are encouraged to include written comments as well. So far the tool has been used mainly with the delivery system components where there are multiple partners from different organizational and disciplinary cultures. Repeating the exercise after two years allows an assessment of trends and identification of improvement (or lack thereof) in specified areas. Questions can be adapted to reflect the different stages in the partnership cycle (e.g. scoping/initiation; implementation/consolidation; transition/exit). 5. Partnering capacity and resourcing The RTB partnership strategy will align with the implementation of RTB CapDev interventions which is premised on the following (1) to pursue and foster partnerships with complementary capacities that respond to CapDev needs expressed by stakeholders. This has already been a strength of the program’s first phase. RTB will also (2) fully tap into the resources provided by the CGIAR CapDev community of practice, like the CapDev framework and the suggested indicators for M&E of each element. Finally, CapDev professionals will (3) work very closely with issues related to data, information, knowledge and communication to allow a maximum level of availability, accessibility and applicability of CapDev products, processes, and lessons learned which will be shared with wider RTB partnerships. Table. RTB partnership modes (ISPC, 2015)2 Mode 1. Agricultural research partnerships (Research Consortia) Name Potato learning alliance for policy action (supported by PASIC) Convener MAAIF (Ministry of Agriculture in Uganda) Specific focus and Joint mapping of the constraints and opportunities for intensification of potato objective production systems in Uganda by the sector stakeholders for improved investment planning and policy action Science agenda Understand the interdependency of constraints, opportunities and actors in the potato sector and the use of novel multi-stakeholder approaches to guide sector investments Geographic Uganda - national level and specific detailed studies in SW Uganda focus/location Role of the CRP RTB is providing key technical knowledge on seed systems, pest- and disease threats, FP: intensification options, drivers of technology adoption and investment/policy planning Flagship 2, 3, 4, and 5 are all involved to map and prioritize innovations at plant, plot, household, value-chain and policy level. 1 Horton, D.; Prain, G.; Thiele, G. (2009). Perspectives on Partnership: A Literature Review. Working Paper 2009-3. International Potato Center (CIP). Lima, Peru. 2 ISPC, 2015. Strategic study of good practice in AR4D partnership. Rome, Italy. CGIAR Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC), viii + 39pp + annex 49pp. 4 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 1 Mode 1. Agricultural research partnerships (Research Consortia) Name Potato learning alliance for policy action (supported by PASIC) Key CGIAR partners and IITA - coordinating the multi-level analysis and with MAAIF coordinate the facilitation their roles of the learning alliance for joint investment planning and policy action CIP - providing technical expertise at yield gap analysis and guiding innovations in the area of seed systems, varieties, and cropping systems. IFPRI - providing technical backstopping on drivers of technology adoption through HH surveys and through action research on farmer decision making. Key ‘external’ partners MAAIF - the policy leader. NARO - backstopping the field research, EPRC - Value chain and their roles study and policy advice, IFDC-CATALIST - Promoting agri-business clusters, Local Government - guide local policy planning and implementation, Private sector - engaged in setting priorities, co-develop zonal investment plans, implementing of and lobby for sector investment. Contribution to impact This multi-scale and multi-actor learning alliance builds joint understanding in pathway and theory of the sector on key interdependent constraints and actors in the potato sector in change Uganda and prioritizes investment planning and policy action to boost the sector's productivity and revenue generation. Mode 2. Agricultural innovation delivery partnerships (Partnerships, platforms and alliances with the private sector, NGO and farmers groups creating value for farmers and companies) Name BBTD Learning Alliance for Sub-Saharan Africa www.bbtvalliance.org Convener RTB Specific focus and To develop prototypes for community initiatives to recover banana production in objective areas affected by BBTD bringing together international scientists, national research programs, farmer and community organizations, local field agencies and laboratories producing clean planting material Science agenda Develop appropriate management packages to recover banana production and delay the spread BBTD; Understand the BBTD epidemiology and ecology for a better knowledge on factors driving the disease spread; Develop tools and procedures for BBTD monitoring, production of clean planting material, understanding gender roles and models for integration for sustainable intensification of production; Geographic focus/location Eight pilot sites in 7 countries of Sub-Saharan Africa representing the four different banana production systems in the region – perennial banana gardens for food security in East and Central Great Lakes Africa, mixed variety banana/plantain in forest fallow zones of Congo Basin, plantain in bush fallow and backyard plots, smallholder dessert banana production Role of the CRP FP: Seed financing to plan alliance and set up pilot sites, framework for ongoing partnership for scaling out and addressing surveillance and exclusion into countries without BBTD Key CGIAR partners and IITA & Bioversity: implementation of RTB planning grant for development and their roles implementation of Alliance strategy; IITA, Bioversity and CIRAD: implementation of RTB research grant focused on learning alliance to recover banana production in BBTD affected areas in Sub Saharan Africa Key ‘external’ partners Universities, NARS and NPPOs in Burundi, Malawi, DRC, Congo, Cameroon, Gabon, and their roles Nigeria, Benin to carry out participatory prototyping of banana recovery and applied field research on BBTD epidemiology and socioeconomics and gender roles in banana cropping, Univ. of Queensland with additional funds to expand work in Benin and Nigeria, Vitropik tissue culture lab providing expertise in in vitro multiplication techniques for plantains and banana. Contribution to impact Developing tools and technologies to enhance the returns on banana production by pathway and theory of utilizing BBTV-free planting materials by complementary innovation for appropriate 5 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 1 Mode 2. Agricultural innovation delivery partnerships (Partnerships, platforms and alliances with the private sector, NGO and farmers groups creating value for farmers and companies) Name BBTD Learning Alliance for Sub-Saharan Africa www.bbtvalliance.org change cropping system practices and market linkages with a strong gender perspective; building national and local capacity to implement effective BBTD initiatives. The initial pilot sites provide key methods and approaches to expand banana recovery to more communities beyond the initial pilot sites. The initial sites also provide recovered banana production sites for clean seed sites and community to community linkages for local expansion of the banana recovery approach. Mode 2. Agricultural innovation delivery partnerships (Partnerships, platforms and alliances with the private sector, NGO and farmers groups creating value for farmers and companies) Name Sweetpotato for Profit and Health Initiative (SPHI) Convener International Potato Center, Sweetpotato Action for Security and Health in Africa (SASHA) Project Manager led 2009-2014; as of 2015 SASHA Project Manager co-leads with Executive Director of the Forum for Agricultural Research for Africa Specific focus and By 2020, the SPHI seeks to invest in breeding, seed systems and sweetpotato objective stakeholders’ capacities in 17 Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) countries so that, in 10 years, 10 million families enhance crop income 15% and diet quality 20% by increasing output and intake, diversifying use, and building gender-equitable market chains. Science agenda Advances in addressing the bottlenecks hindering sweetpotato reaching its full potential are presented and discussed at annual Community of Practice Meetings in the following areas: Breed and Genomics; Seed Systems and Crop Management, Marketing, Processing and Utilization; Monitoring, Learning and Evaluation. In addition, 2 of the CoP groups sponsor on-line discussions on specific topics. Geographic focus/location 17 target countries in sub-Saharan Africa (Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, DR Congo, Burundi, Rwanda, Ethiopia, Malawi, Mozambique, Madagascar, Zambia, South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana, Burkina Faso, Benin Role of the CRP Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) is a member of the SPHI Steering Committee FP: Dagmar Wittine, representing RTB Key CGIAR partners and International Potato Center; HarvestPlus, RTB all members of the SPHI Steering their roles Committee Key ‘external’ partners SPHI Steering Committee Organizations: FARA, PATH (Intl Health NGO), Farm Concern and their roles (regional NGO headquartered in Kenya); Helen Keller International, North Carolina State University, Natural Resources Institute Donors: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, DFID, USAID, Irish Aid, Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa Organization members of the SPHI Steering Committee agree to:  Sharing the SPHI vision of reaching at least 10 million African households by 2020, with knowledge, improved varieties and diversified use of sweetpotato, for improved incomes and health.  Being engaged in sweetpotato-related activities & sharing data on the reach and impact of those activities.  Sharing knowledge gained through its activities and interactions on the Sweetpotato Knowledge Portal, a website to which all registered users can contribute to  Sharing information about emerging sweetpotato technologies with its networks and so contribute to building the network of actors working on sweetpotato in Africa  Appointing a representative to participate actively in annual meetings of the SPHI, covering the representative’s attendance costs 6 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 1 Mode 2. Agricultural innovation delivery partnerships (Partnerships, platforms and alliances with the private sector, NGO and farmers groups creating value for farmers and companies) Name Sweetpotato for Profit and Health Initiative (SPHI)  Participating in relevant communities of practice groups and contribute to the growth and development of these communities Contribution to impact Many partner organizations are interested in taking new varieties of sweetpotato pathway and theory of and/or other technologies-to-scale. Having trained, well informed partners in key to change success among all steps in the impact pathway. Partners are encouraged to send their own staff members to the relevant community of practice (CoP) meetings and to load information about their organization and its relevant projects to the Sweetpotato Knowledge Portal (www.sweetpotatoknowledge.org). Mode 3. National Agri-food systems innovation partnerships (Inter-linked farm to policy multi-stakeholder processes and partnerships action changes in food systems that create social and economic value) Name Irish Potato Coalition Convener VITA, CIP Specific focus and The wider target group initially will be the four million potato farming men and objective women in six countries of East and Southern Africa. Benefiting from this will be tens of millions of urban and rural consumers of potato as a nutritious food. Science agenda To deliver on the goals of the Coalition requires these three strands to reinforce each other under a single results framework encapsulating the aims, objectives and specific work packages. • WP1 Creating viable seed potato systems for four million farmers in 6 countries - present level of 0-2.5% of farmers using improved quality seed to increase to 25%. • WP2 Supporting potato production for small highland farmers to boost nutrition and incomes - present yields of 8 tonnes per hectare to double to 16 tonnes for one million farmers. • WP3 Value chain and business development – a ‘pro poor’ approach to create wealth for potato farmers at affordable prices for consumers - present incomes of US$100 to reach US$300. Geographic focus/location - Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Malawi and Mozambique Role of the CRP Provide robust, high yielding market demanded varieties; technologies and FP: 2,3, 5 approaches to ensure access to quality seed. Improved management options; Evidence based scaling strategies Key CGIAR partners and CIP, Wageningen University – research on seed production, disease and crop their roles management Key ‘external’ partners Teagasc, Wageningen University and will partner with African research centers for and their roles applied research and capacity building. Alliances of agriculture NGOs including Vita, Self Help /Gorta, Concern Universal and Farm Africa will partner with local agriculture offices in support of farmer groups. The Irish Potato Federation members and international agro-industry supporting both seed and ware potato marketing, identify business opportunities and develop business plans. Contribution to impact The innovative lynchpin of the Coalition is—the nexus of a collaborative model of pathway and theory of science, business, and development. Expertise in these domains will be applied over a change long-term horizon and a focus on the whole potato value chain. Access to knowledge and direct field experience from other member’s means that program design and implementation will be catalysts for transformational change. This collective, evidence-based knowledge will be key to breaking new ground as the Coalition pilots best practice and is aligned to the principles of FP2 impact pathway and theory of change in achieving development outcomes through functional partnership models along the entire value chain. 7 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 1 Mode 4. Global development innovation partnerships (Global architectures of MSP platforms create coherence between global and local agendas and implementation strategies and action that brings about systems adaptation) Name Regional banana networks – MUSALAC, INNOVATE PLANTAIN, BARNESA, BAPNET (www.banana-networks.org Convener Bioversity International Specific focus and Raise the profile of banana as a commodity meriting research and development objective resources; Strengthen regional research coordination focused on high priority banana threats; Build research and knowledge innovation initiatives in response to threats and opportunities Science agenda Focus on genetic resource conservation, access and use, response to emerging pest and pathogen threats, more resilient market-linked smallholder production models responding to biotic and abiotic stress Geographic focus/location Banana growing countries in Asia/Pacific, East and Southern Africa, West and Central Africa and Latin America/Caribbean Role of the CRP The framework of RTB FP5 has linked the regional banana networks (along with FP: PROMUSA and MUSANET) into such crucial CRP initiatives as the RTB priority assessment, BananaMapper and task forces on the threats of banana pathogens to smallholder livelihoods. Key CGIAR partners and IITA – partner in networks in Africa; CIRAD – partner in network in West and Central their roles Africa and Latin America/Caribbean; CIAT – partner in network in Latin America/Caribbean Key ‘external’ partners Representatives from over 45 banana producing countries usually from national and their roles research organization or other prominent research entity with recognized leadership role nationally to contribute information and contacts about the status of banana production and marketing, banana research and problems and opportunities to the regular updating of a regional agenda Contribution to impact The regional banana networks, evolving both towards the use of more electronic pathway and theory of tools and the involvement of a wider diversity of stakeholders, occupy a central role change in the multiple dimensions of RTB impact, linking efficiently and effectively the banana community to priority setting and outcome monitoring, to the execution of research projects and to scaling of results 8 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 1 Mode 4. Global development innovation partnerships (Global architectures of MSP platforms create coherence between global and local agendas and implementation strategies and action that brings about systems adaptation) Name Global Cassava Partnership for the 21st Century - GCP21 Convener CIAT, IITA and RTB Specific focus and Importance of building or strengthening all the links in the chain from science to objective development, including the industrial development. The ultimate goal being to increase the cassava yield worldwide but particularly in Africa. Although the partnership is global, because of the huge importance of cassava in Africa for human consumption, most of the GCP21 activities are focusing onto Africa. Science agenda Cover all R&D from the field to the plate, looking for gaps, and weaknesses to be filled by the community including the private sector. Geographic focus/location Worldwide with a special emphasis in Africa. Role of the CRP All the cassava R&D activities that are part of RTB are participating and contributing FP: in multiple ways to the GCP21 activities, allowing to outreach and collaborate with similar and complementary activities in many more institutions, organizations, and private enterprises throughout the world. Key CGIAR partners and IITA – partner in networking in Africa; CIAT – partner in networking in Latin their roles America/Caribbean/Asia; ILRI – partner for animal feed and cassava waste; CIRAD – partner in networking in West and Central Africa for cassava processing, cassava pests and diseases; Key ‘external’ partners ISTRC, GSTRI, GCRI, CATAS – Co-Organizing the first World Congress on Root and and their roles Tuber Crops in Nanning, China; TTDI – Partner in networking in Thailand; NRI - Partner in networking in cassava processing; partnering with all the NARS in cassava producing countries in Africa and South East Asia; ASARECA and CORAF – Partnering in networking for cassava in Africa; FARA and NEPAD partnering for networking in Africa for policy; EU, WB (EAAPP, WAAP) and AfDB partnering for networking in Africa; GAIN, WISHH – partnering for gari processing improvement; FAO, IFAD partnering for networking in Africa; AATF - partnering for networking in Africa and potential host of GCP21-Africa; and many more organizations in the world. Contribution to impact The central role of GCP21 is three fold: pathway and theory of 1- Advocating for the cassava crop to increase awareness of its key role to feed change the world, with the aim to increase funding and R&D, 2- Finding gaps in R&D to increase science and technology for its use to increase efficacy of production, processing and use for food, feed and energy, to increase the translation of science into development through increasing the yield of cassava varieties fit for the use of the final products, 3- Increasing access to information about cassava through websites, meetings, workshops, conferences, publications and more. All of these activities are aiming at impacting the human condition and the well-being of billions of people in the developing world by 2050. 9 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 2 ANNEX 2: RTB Capacity Development (CapDev) Building on achievements of phase I: RTB Phase I included a comprehensive approach to CapDev. Some examples of efficient and successful interventions are related to CapDev in gender research: The RTB evaluation in 2015 noted that the “recent RTB focus on gender capacity strengthening has delivered impressive results over a relatively short period”. On pest and disease management, cross-center CapDev efforts have been focusing on a better understanding among scientists and research partners of seed degeneration, while strengthening capacity of national plant protection organizations to produce and act upon pest risk assessment (PRA). In Africa, learning and training on the banana bunchy top disease (BBTD) has been enabled through experiential learning on pilot sites. CapDev on seed systems in yam and potato focused on knowledge and skills for clean seed production, multiplication, cost-effective propagation techniques and quality certification. A good example in the area of postharvest research relates to developing local capacity among smallholder farmers for postharvest handling and processing of RTB crops in Uganda in order to exploit emerging market opportunities. Between 2013-2014, RTB strengthened the capacity of over 61,000 scientists, NGO staff and farmers— half of which were female—through short training programs. In the same period, degree training programs (MSc and PhD) were offered to 212 researchers in total, including 101 women. Priorities Phase II: Table 1 summarizes the CapDev elements of the CGIAR framework that the FPs intend to address through their clusters. The summary was obtained through a review of the descriptions of each cluster, and the half-page narrative on CapDev in each FP. The three priority interventions relate to gender responsive approaches, as well as institutional and organizational strengthening. Table 1: CapDev interventions per flagship in Phase II CapDev Element FP1 FP2 FP3 FP4 FP5 1. Needs assessment and intervention strategy 2. Learning materials and approaches x x 3. Develop CRPs and Centers’ partnering capacities x 4. Develop future research leaders x x 5. Gender sensitive approaches throughout CapDev x x x x x 6. Institutional Strengthening x x x x 7. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of CapDev x 8. Organizational Development x x x x 9. Research on capacity development x x 10. Capacity to Innovate x CapDev in RTB has several challenges still to address: 1. The review of the impact pathway reveals obvious needs to develop CapDev interventions in more than the described elements. For example, while all impact pathways refer implicitly to the development of partnering capacity and the capacity to innovate, those elements are not yet explicitly addressed in the narratives. This represents an interesting challenge for future planning, implementation, and M&E. 10 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 2 2. Likewise, the development of partnering and innovation capacities is an integral part of organizational and institutional capacities. As such, they play a very big role in RTB even if not explicitly mentioned in most narratives. It is worthwhile to include their analysis into the M&E framework of the program. 3. The absence of mention of needs assessments and intervention strategies could mean that they have been largely addressed in the first phase of the program. However, FP5 could play a role to provide support in this area and assure that CapDev interventions are needs-based and that the design is outcome-orientated. 4. While certainly all FPs will work on the development of future research leaders through MSc, PhD and postdoctoral degree training, it is not surprising that FP1 and FP2 emphasize this form of CapDev; the breeders represent a very well defined and precise target group. This type of capacity building also involves mentoring and coaching of next generation scientists. Role of FP5 in CapDev: Most FP5 CapDev interventions will focus on increasing stakeholders’ capacity to innovate in order to achieve impact at scale. FP5, and specifically CC5.4 include a support and research function on CapDev to enhance cross FP learning on scaling. The learning processes will be guided by the following questions that will constitute the research on CapDev agenda: • What CapDev models and mechanisms have the highest impact on customizing research outputs and bringing them to scale? • Which opportunities exist for using ICTs for reaching and building capacity among development partners and farmers? • What other CapDev interventions and knowledge sharing and learning methods, including institutional changes, are needed to co-create or broker RTB outputs and receive feedback for technology refinement? This work will examine the concept and approaches known as ‘capacity to innovate’. FP 5 could link to and collaborate with other flagships, especially via CC5.4, as follows: FP1 Research with RTB Global networks and partnership initiatives, such as the breeding community of practice. FP2 Institutional capacity to apply evidence-based analytical procedures to develop reliable, robust, profitable and sustainable seed system interventions, identify key research questions, and speed-up the dissemination of new varieties. FP3 Research with RTB global networks and partnership initiatives, such as the BBTD Alliance. Collaboration on advocacy approaches for effective policies and practice that strengthen capacities of partners and clients for using improved data management systems and tools, and defining conducive regulatory frameworks for movement and exchange of planting material. Research on the potential of ICT-based learning and extension approaches to deliver locally- appropriate IPM technologies and underlying ecological concepts to a broad range of farmers. FP4 Gender and youth: Develop and strengthen the capacity of boys and girls to  develop as entrepreneurs  for small businesses along the post-harvest value chain  through,  e.g. the 11 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 2 integration of key messages into school curricula as well as investment in education and trade schools. Research on partnership models, and suitable value chain approaches for going to scale with food-based nutrition programs and value chains focusing on women and young children. CapDev and education research, such as the question of how to develop concerted approaches to advocacy, nutrition education and the adoption of safety standards. Implementation mechanisms: CapDev in the second phase of RTB will function along three strategic pillars: 1. The projects that are part of a cluster will receive support to discuss, design and integrate CapDev interventions in alignment with the CGIAR CapDev framework, ensuring that the interventions are needs-based and aligned with the flagship’s impact pathway and intended outcomes. Priorities will be set to develop a budget that aligns with the CapDev objectives. Monitoring and evaluation indicators will be identified and corresponding M&E activities supported. 2. FP5 on livelihoods at scale entails the CC5.4 on innovation and scaling. As detailed above, this cluster will be the home for research on technical and institutional innovation and provide many opportunities for learning and improving capacity development. Specifically FP5 will have a research component on stakeholders’ capacity to innovate, and provide support functions to RTB clusters through a dedicated community of practice. 3. At the program level, we will work with partners to identify strategic CapDev interventions which are considered to entail high learning and impact potential. Those will receive strong support in planning, implementation and M&E. This will support the development of CapDev dedicated impact pathways, and document the outcomes in greater depth beyond project specific activities, in order to be able to reflect fully the achievement of the program and its contributions to the relevant CapDev sub-IDOs. Three principles for the implementation of CapDev interventions are (1) to pursue and foster partnerships with complementary capacities that respond to CapDev needs expressed by stakeholders. This has already been a strength of the program’s first phase. RTB will also (2) fully tap into the resources provided by the CGIAR CapDev community of practice, like the CapDev framework and the suggested indicators for M&E of each element. Finally, CapDev professionals will (3) work closely with issues related to data, information, knowledge and communication to allow a maximum level of availability, accessibility and applicability of CapDev products, processes, and lessons learned. CapDev impact pathway: The tables below describe the impact pathways for each of the five flagships. The entry points are the capacity development elements that the flagship plans to implement. The CapDev outputs and outcomes derive from the flagship narratives and corresponding impact pathways. The sub- IDOs are those prioritized by each flagship, and the indicators are taken from the Performance Indicators Matrix. 12 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 2 FP 1: Discovery research for enhanced utilization of RTB genetic resources CapDev elements CapDev Outputs FP CapDev Outcomes Sub IDOs Indicators (4) Developing Short and long term individual training Researchers in RTB Partner institutions identify at least 20 future research for breeders, geneticists, genetic countries have improved candidates (at least 30% female) for leaders through resource managers; staff exchanges; their skills for advanced degree training fellowships training at MSC, PHD level from RTB implementing clonal crop At least 15 candidates supported for countries and women scientists breeding advanced degree training, of which at (5) Gender- Training approaches and material Breeders and geneticists least 30% are female (by 2020) responsive tailored for breeders and geneticists collaborating with Enhanced approaches on how to make breeding objectives Breeding community of practice national programs in RTB institutional throughout capacity more responsive to the preferences established in collaboration with at least countries introduced capacity of development of both male and female farmers 15 stakeholders in 6 countries (2017) participatory gender- partner research and to consumer preferences responsive methods for organizations Breeding community of practice under (6) Institutional Information and advocacy strategies trait definition and implementation in collaboration with at Enhanced strengthening and materials on non-conventional selection in their own least 20 stakeholders in 6 countries individual breeding for governments and projects (2019) capacity in regulatory agencies based on NARS, ARIs and CGIAR partner research Participatory methods for trait definition derived prototypes or products with Centers have shared organizations and selection (including at least 30% of new traits more effectively genetic female participants) used in 50% of (8) Organizational Organizational arrangements and resources, data, services RTB/partners joint activities (2018) development partnership models for strengthening and co-developing advanced labs and facilities Enhanced capacity of at least 400 R&D Knowledge sharing mechanisms partners, of which at least 30% are developed and maintained through female, through short and long term Breeding CoP trainings (2022) 13 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 2 FP2: Adapted productive varieties and quality seed of RTB crops CapDev elements Cap Dev Outputs FP CapDev Outcomes Sub IDOs Indicators (2) Design and E-learning training modules on technical R&D partners have applied Women's participation increased delivery of innovative protocols, guidelines on best practices and evidence-based analytical by 30% for the design of RTB learning and principles; interactive decision support tools, procedures to develop supported capacity development information as e.g. the ProMusa network reliable, robust, profitable and extension interventions in the materials and (www.promusa.org/musapedia). and sustainable seed field of seed multiplication / seed approaches system interventions, management / crop management (4) Developing future Training at MSc and PhD level; hands-on identified key research designed research leaders mentorships; sponsorships to meetings. questions, and speed-up 150 individuals (50% female) through fellowships the development and trained through long term (5) Gender- Strategies that assure women farmers’ dissemination of new programs (e.g. MSc and PhD responsive participation in training and benefits from it. varieties. students) (2021) approaches Researchers in RTB have throughout capacity Enhanced Every year, 8,000 R&D implemented conventional development. and advanced breeding individual stakeholders (50% female) trained (6) Institutional Co-investment strategies with R&D partners capacity through short term programs on and selection methods strengthening in facilities, equipment, and provision of designing and implementing information and recurrent backstopping to Partners have fostered smallholder-oriented breeding improve institutional skill sets. women’s participation, co- programs and sustainable seed (8) Organizational Training and action learning with male and developed and systems (2022) learning and female farmers, processors, and public and used participatory gender- development private seed multipliers on varietal sensitive and gender- selection, cultural practices, postharvest responsive research techniques, seed production, disease methods  diagnostics and quality control; capacity RTB actors along the value strengthening of breeders in conventional chain have applied and advanced breeding and selection improved technical and methods. business seed systems skills 14 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 2 FP3: Resilient RTB crops CapDev element Cap Dev Outputs CapDev Outcomes Sub IDOs Indicators (5) Gender- Tools and methods for CapDev Research institutes, Gender differentiated needs assessment of responsive on gender-responsive extensions systems and capacity development available in at least 8 approaches approaches in designing and NGOs working on ICM and pest/country combinations (2017) throughout capacity disseminating crop IPDM, have introduced Women's participation increased by at least development management practices and gender-responsive 30% for the design of RTB supported capacity IPDM. approaches in their development and extension interventions in Mentoring, post-graduate technical assistance and the field of IPM and ICM (2019) training for women; gender- capacity development At least 33% of female participants ensured in responsive learning and activities Increased capacity for all capacity development efforts (including extension. Development of Plant health agencies and innovation in extension services providing advice on ICM media, materials for awareness national governments have partner org. and and IPM) (2020) and action. elaborated and/or adapted communities (6) Institutional Advocacy approaches to use regulatory frameworks and Multi-stakeholder initiatives for promoting Strengthening improved data management, policies based on scientific refinement and scale of selected sustainable define conducive regulatory evidences management practices under implementation frameworks for movement and in 10 countries (2020) NARS, extension systems, exchange of planting material NGOs and the private sector Growing number of extension services (8) Organizational FP3: ICM, IPM learning disseminate validated (governmental org., NGOs and private sector) Development platforms. Participatory action technologies and practices providing advice on improved ICM and IPDM research on expert systems increased (2022) 15 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 2 FP4: Nutritious RTB foods and value added through post-harvest innovation CapDev element Cap Dev Outputs CapDev Outcomes Sub IDOs Indicators (2) Design and Training-of-trainers courses; NARS and private sector Dissemination approaches more effective delivery of development and promotion of recipes have engaged with end and efficient through use of improved innovative learning users to adapt education/counseling and SBCC methods, materials and environmentally friendly better targeting through partnerships with approaches processing and storage nutrition/health agencies, and stronger (5) Gender- Strategies to enhance the capacity of technologies with focus on monitoring and learning based on responsive boys and girls to develop as women and youth improved metrics and processes - applied approaches entrepreneurs along the postharvest entrepreneurship. Increased to OFSP, biofortified cassava and throughout value chain, integration of key messages capacity for Health, education, and additional RTB crops in 10 countries capacity into school curricula, investment in innovation in agriculture stakeholders (2018) development. education, trade schools partner org. established platforms and and Novel institutional arrangements (e.g. (6) Institutional Partnership models, value chain partnership arrangements communities research-private industry innovation strengthening approaches, and strong evidence base to for designing and platforms) established in 4 countries to strengthen institutional capacity for implementing food-based foster innovation and scaling of RTB going to scale nutrition programs and processing technologies and value chains (8) Organizational Engagement strategies with end users to value chains focusing on (2019) learning and adapt environmentally friendly women and young development processing and storage technologies; 10,000 individuals (e.g. bakers, children. platforms for knowledge exchange on processors, equipment fabricators, postharvest technologies and nutritious Researchers, private sector extension officers), of which at least 33% RTB products and government agencies are female, trained in business and (9) Research on Evidence-based CapDev strategies on actively exchange and products development (2021) capacity how to develop concerted approaches utilize knowledge on 60 partner development organizations, development to advocacy, nutrition education, and successful technologies and including women's networks and the adoption of safety standards products to accelerate gains alliances, having increased their capacity for innovation (e.g. enhanced human capital and improved collaboration network in relevant domains) (2022) 16 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 2 FP5: Improved Livelihoods at Scale CapDev element Cap Dev Outputs CapDev Outcomes Sub IDOs Indicators (3) Develop CRPs Approaches to CapDev on partnership for RTB FPs have At least 20% increase of female scientists and Center scaling models developed partnership participating in key-decision-making processes partnering diversification options concerning RTB interventions and strategies capacity and adopt more (2020) (5) Gender- Framework to learn, link and leverage effective partnering Improved Gender and youth capacity development responsive resources to increase youth employment tools capacity of strategies and training materials developed approaches and agripreneurship RTB scientists have women and and/or adapted in collaboration with key throughout Tools and methods for CapDev on gender used detailed current young partners in xx countries (2019) capacity responsive and transformative approaches scenarios for youth people to development At least 1,500 users of RTB knowledge sharing engagement in RTB participate (7) Planning, PM&E system on progress towards mechanisms with strengthened capacity for production, value in decision- Monitoring and completion of CapDev outcomes capturing designing, implementing and assessing RTB addition and marketing making evaluation the gender dimension of research (2021) (PM&E) of related CapDev variables RTB and partners have Increased 150 individuals (50% female) trained through capacity implemented CapDev capacity to long term programs (e.g. MSc and PhD development activities that adopt students) (2022) (9) Research on Evidences on best CapDev models and strengthen gender- research responsive R&D along outputs At least 44 bi-annual stakeholder meetings held capacity mechanisms, ICT's, CapDev and scaling, impact pathways across target countries for co-design of impact development communication for scaling and Increased pathways and M&EL around implementation, operationalizing capacity to innovate RTB has used capacity for including needs assessment and customized (10) Capacity to Training and co-learning approaches with collaborative M&EL innovation product development (2019) innovate researchers of RTB centers and systems and IA to Enhanced measure progress At least 1 systems innovation coalition per international and national partner institutional organizations to upgrade skills for towards impact and action site experiment with prioritized capacity facilitate continuous alternative interventions options (2017) customizing research outputs into scalable technologies, and for brokering relations improvement Enhanced RTB delivery flagships and at least 55 research between diverse stakeholders to achieve individual R&D partners have and development partner organizations with expected changes. capacity implemented more more gender-responsive planning and effective knowledge implementation processes, reflected in at least Case-based learning sessions around successful processes of knowledge sharing and CapDev 5 additional collaborative arrangements with approaches and tools public sector and civil society organizations translation and brokerage, identification of supporting gender transformation (2022) best practices and CapDev champions 17 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 3 ANNEX 3: RTB Gender Key goal and objectives RTB’s gender objective is to improve food security and reduce poverty while strengthening gender equity. For this to happen, both men and women farmers must be able to benefit from science and technology interventions developed by the RTB research team and its partners. A key goal of the gender strategy is to level the playing field where possible by providing access to knowledge, capacity building, and market opportunities, and by ensuring that the technology developed through the program is made available to both sexes. However, RTB research and evaluations have shown that men and women are not always equally benefiting from RTB technologies. For example, women may adopt technologies more slowly than men due to gender related constraints, such as lack of access to knowledge, information, training, resources and decision making powers within the home (Mudege, et al. 2015)1. Thus in order to ensure that RTB research and technology development contributes to meeting gender equitable IDOs and targets RTB aims to 1) mainstream gender across the RTB flagships and clusters with gender integrated research 2) undertake strategic gender research to build a body of knowledge on gender and agri-food system innovation for RTB crops. RTB will develop a set of gender impact indicators to monitor changes and access to resources, in agricultural production, research and entrepreneurship as a result of adoption of RTB technologies and innovations. In order to equip RTB scientists and partners to do gender-responsive research and achieve gender transformational outcomes and empowerment of women and youth, guidelines and briefs on gender research methods and context-specific gender situational analyses will be developed. A gender capacity development program will ensure that 1) expertise on gender research is available within RTB and 2) non-gender experts within RTB know when and how to make use of this expertise. To achieve this, the program is guided by the RTB gender strategy which outlines priority areas for gender research. In preparation for RTB Phase II, the strategy will be revisited, updated and operationalized taking into consideration lessons learned (see 1.4) from RTB Phase I and in alignment with the new RTB structure and flagships. A cross cutting Flagship Project 5 (FP5) contains CC5.3 on gender equitable development and youth employment that will provide learning and support for all FPs to contribute towards achieving gender responsive sub-IDOs – gender equitable control of productive assets and resources, and improved capacity of women and young people to participate in decision-making. RTB will mainstream gender through integrated and strategic gender research. Integrated Gender Research Integrated Gender Research is the systematic integration of gender into research process— priority setting, planning, design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation - and into the management of this process (Ashby et al, 2013)2. The purpose of gender integration is to consider gender norms and cultural practices when designing and implementing research in order to develop strategies to address gender based inequalities when developing a program or research strategy. In RTB, this means integrating a 1 Mudege, N.N.; T.; Kapalsa; Chevo, T.; Nyekanyeka, , E.; Demo, P. 2015. Gender norms and the marketing of seeds and ware potatoes in Malawi. Journal Article the Journal of Gender, Agricultural and Food security. Vol 1, Issue 2, pp 18-41. Africa Centre for Gender, Social Research and Impact Assessment: Nairobi. 2 Ashby, J.A., Annina Lubbock, Hendrika Stuart (2013): Assessment of the Status of Gender Mainstreaming in CGIAR Research Programs CGIAR Consortium. 18 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 3 gender dimension into Flagships 1 to 5. Key to facilitating gender integration in these flagships is to ensure that there are resources set aside for integrated gender research across the flagships. Integrated gender research will involve some or all of the following: methodological aspects of collection and use of relevant sex-disaggregated information, analysis of gender-related constraints and opportunities, studies of the impact of research and development on gender equality outcomes. Integrated gender research will focus on specific key areas within each of the flagships (Table 1). Table 1. Gender integration options by Flagship Project Flagships Gender Research Objective FP1: Discovery research for Develop a gendered understanding of indigenous knowledge and practice in enhanced utilization of RTB the conservation and use of genetic resources. genetic resources FP2: Adapted productive Characterize gender differentiated preferences for traits and their varieties and quality seed of consequences, in order to help breeding strategies accelerate varietal RTB crops development. FP3: Resilient RTB crops Understand local knowledge of male and female farmers in disease management in order to develop information and communications strategies that inform both women and men of safe pest and disease control methods. FP4: Nutritious food and value Develop inclusive RTB value chains that improve access to and utilization of added through postharvest RTB products for nutrition and health as well as to promote gender equity in innovation the distribution of benefits from increased commercialization. FP 5: Integrated systems for Ensure that developed RTB technologies, tools and innovations are useful to livelihoods men, women and youth farmers and lead to livelihood improvement and increased wellbeing Under Integrated gender research, RTB will also undertake selected studies on topics that have greater gender relevance and contribute towards developing gender specific tools and methods, and explore the potential of undertaking cross-CRP collaborations for co-investments and complementary gender research. The trainers guide on Gender Integrated Participatory Market Chain Approach (PMCA) is one of the examples of PIM and RTB cross collaboration work in Phase I. Guidelines to integrate a gender perspective in CGIAR centers intervention in value chain development for RTB crops will be piloted in Phase II. Tools, guidelines and modules for gender responsive participatory varietal selection will be rolled out. In order to meet flagship objectives RTB will ensure that gender budgets are adequate. For example in addition to budgeting for personnel and sex disaggregated surveys we would ensure increased budget for gender integrated research as well as outcome support to achieving more equitable access to RTB technologies. Most of the gender work conducted in RTB has been on nutritious foods, value addition through post-harvest processing and trait selection in breeding and varietal selection. One of the key areas on which RTB would like to focus is integrating gendered knowledge and preferences into banana breeding in Tanzania and on cassava trait preference to inform genomics assisted cassava breeding. Research in cassava breeding will be undertaken in a close collaboration with the NEXTGEN cassava project3 and various national partners in East and West Africa. Likewise, banana breeding will be done 3 NEXTGEN cassava project is an initiative taken by Cornell University researchers with various national and international partners. It is supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK Department for International Development (http://www.nextgencassava.org/). 19 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 3 with the Breeding Better East African Highland Bananas (BB-EAHB) project and other national partners in Tanzania. Research on gender and potato trait preference will continue in selected SSA countries. While this is important in the next phase we would also like to see more investments in resilient cropping systems and discovery research. To further institutionalize integrated gender research, RTB has adopted an approach towards harmonizing and strengthening gender capacity for RTB in-house staff members and partners by continuing to undertake capacity development activities in close coordination with RTB partnering centers’ GFPs and following up with the trained participants to establish a feedback loop for monitoring, evaluation and learning. We expect that this work will continue in Phase II. Strategic gender research Strategic gender research refers to specialized studies on dimensions of gender relations that can affect research and development outcomes. The main research focus is on gender roles, norms and agency, rather than on technical issues, into which gender is integrated. Strategic gender research in RTB is housed in FP 5. This type of research can crosscut flagships and Centers and is of importance to strengthening equity and efficiency. Strategic gender research is also expected to contribute insights and research conclusions to all RTB flagships and thus strengthen integrated gender research. Examples of research questions and areas of focus of strategic gender research are: • How do gender norms and agency advance or impede the capacity to innovate and to adopt technology in agriculture and NRM across different contexts? • How do new agricultural technologies or practices affect gender norms and agency across different contexts? Under what conditions can they do harm to women? And how are gender norms and women’s and men’s agency changing, and under what conditions do these changes catalyze innovation and lead to desired development outcomes (CGIAR SLOs)? What contextual factors influence this relationship? • What are the gender roles and dimensions of inequality in RTB seed systems? • How does intra-household resource use and decision-making for equity and innovation vary in different RTB agri-food systems? • What are the gender implications of agro-industrialization and gender dimensions in access to RTB based agro enterprises in different regions and countries? To answer these questions, RTB is collaborating with other CRPs in the CGIAR global study on Enabling Gender Equality in Agriculture and Natural Resource Management (GENNOVATE) and has a total of 15 case-studies in RTB target countries: Uganda (4), Malawi (2), Burundi (1), Nigeria (2), Colombia (4), Bangladesh (2) and Vietnam (2). The first few products of this study are expected to come out as scientific publications, reports, guidelines and methods in early 2017. FP5 on improved livelihoods at scale will make it possible to pilot GENNOVATE lessons with the objective of contributing to gender related sub-IDOs and IDOs. In Phase I it was learned that when interventions do not address underlying social structures and gender norms related to household decision making and control of income agriculture research may not benefit women. For instance, although a seed potato project aimed to ensure that men and women have access to clean seed, women did not have access to quality potato seed because they lacked access to credit and training, and did not control household income to purchase seed (Mudege et al 2015). Research on long shelf life banana and potato ambient storage technology in Uganda also had similar results. Gender norms 20 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 3 and ideologies can be barriers to access, therefore projects need to address these in order to contribute to development outcomes including women’s empowerment. The strategic gender research will therefore make significant contributions towards meeting IDOs. Strategic gender research creates an enabling environment for integrated gender research and sets the scene for gender transformative outcomes. Gender transformative outcomes are those outcomes where both men and women are helped while gender roles are transformed and more gender-equitable relationships between men and women are promoted. However, it is more challenging to achieve gender- transformative outcomes, given the structural gender inequalities in many sectors that are not easily influenced by an agricultural research program. Research in RTB has shown that addressing gender norms to achieve transformation is not always easy as researchers, and in many cases extension officers and partners, often lack experience or are uncomfortable addressing these issues. As noted below RTB will reevaluate its partnership approach to ensure that non-traditional partners who can help us to achieve transformative outcomes are engaged. Impact pathway Measurement of progress towards gender impact in RTB will be systematic and undertaken at all stages of the research cycle. It will be based on the regular monitoring of a set of identified gender responsive indicators which will contribute towards achieving gender sub-IDOs and IDOs. These indicators will be developed at all levels (products, research and development outcomes) from the impact pathway for both integrated and strategic gender research. RTB envisages two main strands in the impact pathway. The first contributes to the technical research undertaken in integrated gender research across all flagships. Technical research will focus on topics which have greater gender relevance and also contribute towards developing gender specific tools and methods. These areas will be identified in a priority assessment exercise for gender research during the updating exercise of the RTB gender strategy. The second strand will concentrate on catalyzing a change in attitudes and practices of next users and end users in relation to adoption and use of gender and youth responsive outcomes and results of RTB flagships. This change in attitude and practice is achieved through harmonizing and strengthening the capacity of RTB researchers, scientists and partners through investments and interventions on capacity development and an interdisciplinary teamwork approach, which promotes continuous interactions among a team of experts while undertaking empirical integrated gender research. One of the underlying assumptions that emerged from gender work in Phase I is that as knowledge, understanding and skills on gender responsive research improve, the more gender equity concerns are taken into consideration by scientists, researchers and partners while setting research priorities and designing questions. Integrated gender research contributes to gender responsive outcomes while strategic gender research can build on this to contribute to gender transformative outcomes. Through the use of integrated gender and strategic gender research the gender impact pathway will contribute to two IDOs (See Fig. 1): 1. Increased and more gender-equitable income for poor participants in RTB value chains (SLO 1, 2) 2. More effective policies supporting development and use of pro-poor and gender inclusive RTB technologies developed and adopted by agricultural organizations, national governments and international bodies (SLO 1, 2) Progress towards these IDOs will be tracked using milestones and indicators that have logical links to the impact pathway. These indicators will be developed based on outcomes delineated in the performance indicator matrix. 21 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 3 Figure 1 shows the gender impact pathway depicting outcomes from Integrated and strategic gender research with associated risks and assumptions. Figure 1. Gender impact pathway 22 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 4 ANNEX 4: RTB Youth Strategy Background and rationale Youth unemployment is a major challenge, but can also be an opportunity for youth to become the engine, driving new agriculture and agribusiness enterprises as well as rural transformation (Brooks et al. 2012). Continued population growth in certain regions means that there are large numbers of young people entering the labor market each year, especially in SSA, South and SE Asia. Each year in Africa alone 10-12 million young people seek to enter the workforce, too many without success (AGRA 2015). While agriculture and agribusiness provide opportunities for youth, many face hurdles in trying to earn a livelihood from these areas (FAO, CTA IFAD 2014). Projections by world urbanization prospects and world population prospects estimate that until 2050, rural populations will decrease globally (-150m), but populations in rural SSA will continue to grow by 350m, and rural South Asia will increase until mid-2040 (Losch, 2015). In these two regions rising rural populations pose challenges for the absorption of a growing labor force and for its consequences on demographic densities, farm structures and natural resources. The highest population growth is occurring is in SSA, South and SE Asia (Figure 1). Africa will account for 60% of the world’s increased labor force with research showing that, between now and 2030, SSA’s economies will have to incorporate 370m youth, 220m in rural areas and 150m in cities. Figure 1. Rural Population Increase and growth of labor force (2010-2050) Source: Losch, 2015 23 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 4 Exclusion of youth from agriculture for research and development may lead to negative social externalities and reinforce existing unequal power relations that exacerbate their conditions in challenging social contexts. Agriculture related youth programs and youth oriented research can provide opportunities to address the feminization of agricultural labor and build a critical mass of youth with skills and capacity to seize opportunities in the agricultural sector. Therefore, specific considerations of the challenges facing youth a must be embedded in the overall program strategy and approach. Moreover, rural educated youth in developing countries are gradually disengaging from agricultural sector activities and migrating to urban areas. Those who remain in rural areas often have fewer education and economic opportunities. For example, young girls in rural areas often marry at an early age according to local and customary social traditions. Such practices have health impacts, i.e. child birth complications, and affect their opportunities to pursue activities outside the household. Gender norms often relegate women and girls to domestic chores and childcare activities. Early analysis of GENNOVATE data from RTB and Humidtropics in Western Kenya revealed that girls face more challenges to continuing education than boys. These stem from parents preferential treatment of boys in the household, and early pregnancies. Boys cited problems of high unemployment and high incidence of drug and alcohol abuse that trap youth in poverty. It is thus important to have a systematic youth analysis of key production constraints, opportunities and value chains vis-à-vis RTB crops to ensure that both young girls and boys benefit. The youth rural to urban migration often leaves a gap in which small family farms with specific labor shortages for physically demanding tasks of ploughing, harvesting, and transporting are not met. This may require families to change to less labor- intensive crops of potential lower economic and nutritional value. Today’s youth have higher rates of literacy and experience with IT, social media and technology platforms than previous generations. Engaging them in various innovative and climate resilient production and management systems, partnership building and marketing will help the RTB program not only in to harness their potential and contribute to a modern agricultural system with online record, new technologies and markets. Objective and approach of engaging youth in the RTB program RTB will seek to engage youth as a key stakeholder with an overall objective to develop their capacity, and create more economic opportunities to engage them in RTB linked enterprises. RTB will link practical initiatives to engage youth in pilot sites with youth analysis as a framework to learn, link and leverage resources to increase youth employment, including: 1. What are the different roles, responsibilities, assets, and agency of young men and women (compared with older men and women), including their differential access to, control over, and use of natural, financial, social, political, and infrastructure-related resources? 2. What are the aspirations of youth considering different contexts and gender differences? 3. Which technical breakthroughs in RTB production and processing offer best opportunities for youth advancement and how are they best packaged? 4. What incentives are required to best strengthen business skills among youth? 5. How do the yields and profits of accelerated youth agricultural ventures based upon RTB technologies compare to other options, and how can they be optimized? 24 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 4 Youth analysis and practical action to stimulate youth employment will be integrated in different FPs. In addition, RTB has a dedicated cluster for gender equitable development and youth employment in FP5. This will learn from and build on the IITA youth agriprenneur initiative (see Box 1) which engaged youth in crop production practices, seed multiplication, agribusiness, including commercial processing and sale of Vitamin A rich cassava flour, and is now in a process of reviewing the initiative to scale up. Currently there are established six R4D platforms (Burundi, DDRC, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda) and 12 innovation platforms in six different countries in East and Central Africa. This initiative is linked to Box1: Anecdote from Ma Kahasha the gender equitable development and youth “My training in Ibadan was a great experience in my life as it has helped me to employment cluster see and appreciate agriculture in various forms. Previously, I had a negative view of agriculture but this training has changed it positively. During this training I got under FP5 and supported an opportunity to visit Thai farm and Niji farm and these visits motivated me. In by the RTB gender fact it helped me to be aware of the many agricultural opportunities that youth strategy. The gender and can engage with, such as agribusiness. I really appreciate this initiative of IITA that youth cluster is allied to aims to engage more young boys and girls in agribusiness as a means of alleviating the youth strategy to national and international youth unemployment, which is one of the major achieve gender and challenges of our decade” youth responsive IDOs in ~Gracia Kahasha all flagships and clusters. Technical backstopping, Source: IITA Youth Agripreneurs special issue February 2014 mentoring and coaching within multidisciplinary teams including RTB partners like young men and women farmers and youth organizations representatives, will also lead to adoption and generation of gender and youth responsive cluster and flagships outcomes. This will contribute to sub-IDOs including improved capacity of women and young people to participate in decision –making and youth and gender related IDOs. Partnership and outreach For partnership and outreach, youth related activities link with the RTB gender partnership approach by focusing on partnership with young farmers and youth organizations, NARES, NGOs, private sector, women’s networks and youth groups to support delivery of new technologies developed by research. RTB has established a partnership initiative with universities to increase gender research in RTB project sites and to provide research opportunities, field sites, networks, technical, and project support for graduate students and visiting scholars. This initiative will raise awareness of CGIAR and RTB work on university campuses and encourage young graduate students to pursue research on gender focused research. Building on this partnership initiative, RTB will try to expand the youth program and explore linkages with university faculty to find graduate students who are interested to work on youth research areas that are of prime interest of RTB. Outreach activities will target three geographic regions of RTB— Asia, Latin America and Africa. Monitoring and evaluation RTB will develop youth indicators and include in M&E in close collaboration with partners and stakeholders. However, the collection and use of age- and sex-disaggregated data, application of youth and trend analysis in social norms, attitudes, and behaviors that influence young women’s and men’s 25 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 4 aspirations and needs, preferences for and adoption of innovations made by RTB scientists and partners is contemplated in the existing gender and youth cluster as part of M&E system. Budget There is no separate budgetary allocation for youth research on RTB from Windows 1 and 2 in first phase. RTB Phase II has a specific cluster on gender and youth, for which a budget allocation and specific budget line for youth related research will be articulated. Moreover, we will pursue collaborations with strategic partners and generate new bilateral project proposals for this important area, potentially linked with agripreneurs. References Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). 2015. Africa Agriculture Status Report: Youth in Agriculture in Sub- Saharan Africa. Nairobi, Kenya. Issue No. 3. Brooks, K., Zorya, S., & Gautam, A. 2012. Employment in agriculture; Jobs for Africa’s youth, 2012 Global Food Policy Report, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). FAO CTA IFAD, 2014. Youth and agriculture: Key challenges and concrete solutions. Published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in collaboration with the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). Rome. Losch, B. 2015. Understanding the context for youth employment: The structural challenges. Presentation made on the Workshop on Mobilizing Youth within Phase 2 CGIAR CRPs. Montpellier: CGIAR Consortium Office. September 8-9, 2015. Available: http://www.slideshare.net/IFPRI-PIM/mobilizing-youth-within-phase-2-cgiar- crps 26 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 5 ANNEX 5: Results-based management strategy for RTB 1. Results-Based Management strategy a. Purpose RTB will strengthen implementation of RBM, piloted in Phase I by RTB (see RTB-Brief 1) and Humidtropics (see Humidtropics presentation), in order to: (1) improve program performance; (2) strengthen a results-oriented culture for the planning, managing and assessment of research for development interventions; (3) support adaptive management, organizational learning and informed decision-making at all levels; and (4) promote greater accountability, transparency and value for money. b. Principles The RBM strategy is founded on five principles: (1) a clear and logical program design that ties resources and activities to expected results; (2) description of roles and responsibilities for RTB scientists/management as well as for partners involved in implementation; (3) sound judgments on how to improve performance on an ongoing basis; (4) demonstrated accountability and benefits to stakeholders; and (5) reliable and timely information made available to CGIAR and key stakeholders. c. Steps in managing for results Given that RBM is a management strategy, it will be part of the overall ongoing CRP life-cycle (see Fig. 1) and will include the following key steps: • Defining and revising, based on evidences and lessons learnt, the impact pathways at all program levels; • Strategic budget allocation based on ex-ante assessment of expected results and corroborated by ex-post IA results; • Planning and budgeting for monitoring and evaluation; • Establishing implementing and monitoring responsibilities and accountabilities internally and with partners; • Monitoring and analyzing performance and risks information; • Using MEIA findings and risks information for adaptive management and organizational learning; • Annual rewarding of good performances through performance-based budgeting (not intended to modify strategic budget allocation); • Reporting performances and results. 27 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 5 Figure 1 – The RBM life-cycle approach d. Implementation within CRP The CRP and flagship theories of change and impact pathways as presented in the proposal above (see section 1.3 and 2.3) were developed using a bottom-up approach. To stress the centrality of strong alliances with stakeholders, RTB started the development of ToCs at the cluster level involving cluster teams and partners. These results were then consolidated at the higher levels. Not all the clusters had the opportunity to fine-tune their impact pathways with stakeholders during the proposal development. RTB will then continue applying the methodology refined with the RBM pilot at the beginning of the new phase. Stakeholders and partners involved with a selected RTB cluster at focus country and sub-regional levels will co-develop impact pathways and agree on the framework for joint activities and M&E mechanisms through participatory workshops. These workshops, jointly planned with other CRPs, will contribute in the second phase to site integration strategies and plans. Stakeholders with experience in gender integration and mobilizing women and other social groups will be included. The set of nested ToCs and impact pathways constitute the backbone of the RTB’s RBM framework. They serve as the CRP's hypotheses of the way change is expected to occur from output to outcome and impact. They are meant to be dynamic documents and adapted as evidence is further collected. For all FPs and clusters, research products were identified, discovery pipelines - in the case of FP1 - and impact pathways - for the other FPs - tentatively mapped out, scaling strategies agreed and indicators for (Sub)- IDOs and lower result levels constructed to provide the basis for results-based management (RBM) and are shown in Performance indicator Matrix, tables B, C and D (Annex 3.11). e. Interoperable tools to support RBM implementation RTB is characterized by a broad thematic and geographical area of intervention, a large number of partners contributing to its implementation and a light structure for its management. To address and adapt its management to this complexity, RTB needs to maintain its RBM framework flexible and iterative. This situation requires the establishment of clear flow of information and a good capacity to manage the quantity and diversity of data generated by all the implementing stakeholders. In order to respond to this need, in 2015, RTB started a collaboration with Dryland Systems (DS) to adapt and develop the web-based Planning, Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning platform (PMELP) initiated by DS. This platform will be adopted by DCL in the coming phase and as center-wide solution by ICARDA and CIP. The platform (http://mel.cgiar.org/) enables better RBM including planning, reporting, coordination, 28 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 5 risk management, performance evaluation, as well as knowledge sharing and learning amongst different groups of stakeholders (donors, partners, and scientists) within and across CRPs and CG centers. The PMEL platform supports and facilitates the collection, storage, analysis and sharing of data on technical implementation of CRPs and links these data with financial information thereby enabling timely and informed decision-making, transparent reporting to donors and reduction in administrative/transaction time and costs. Some of the key features are: • Research planning, reporting and monitoring tool with customizable workflow and chain of approvals; • Data management for research outputs, CapDev and outcome indicators across CRPs/CG centers to reduce burden of data input and facilitate comparison and analysis across interventions; • Outcome story writing tool for sourcing high-impact communications; • Data management on partnerships and customizable survey for partnership assessment (under development); • Customizable alignment with internal Finance and HR management systems (e.g. OCS, Talent Management); • Customizable alignment with open repositories (e.g. D-Space) and internal sharing systems (e.g Sharepoint); • Multiple data and document tagging that avoids double/multiple uploading on different organizational systems; • Enables timely production of different types of reports based on needs and requirements of different users and audiences including customization of bilateral projects reporting to serve specific donors requirements; • Compatible with Open Access requirements, using Dublin Core Metadata. It can be linked with any Open Access Repository as well as using any Creative Commons license. Furthermore, PMEL platform enables Learning and Knowledge sharing via: • Integration with Open repository (linkage with D-Space); • Discussion Forums to enhance collaboration amongst stakeholders across different geographies, CRPs, CG centers, and partners. The PMEL platform uses full stack open source environment. 2. Monitoring, Evaluation, Learning and Impact Assessment (MELIA) a. Purpose In order to effectively implement the RBM framework, strengthening monitoring, evaluation, learning and impact assessment (MELIA) will be necessary at both project and program levels. A robust and strategic plan is proposed and will support CRP cycle of planning, budget allocation and reporting steps. RTB will use a modular approach for the implementation of the strategy, which will include a suite of tools, guidelines and best practices. Furthermore, plans will be put in place to systematically review the strategy and make necessary adjustments, where required, to better assist staff and management in delivering and improving the performance of RTB. It is expected that the strategy and its modules will improve over time as more information is gathered and experience in gained in implementing such a framework. MELIA will support RBM implementation while playing the following core functions: 29 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 5 1. Provide data, information, and evidences on delivering outputs, contributing to outcomes and ensuring value for money; 2. Review the consistency of ToC, document evidences showing causal relationships among outputs and outcomes, identify unintended outcomes; 3. Collect and analyze information on partnership effectiveness in achieving results; 4. Organize knowledge and experience sharing within the program members and among partners. b. MELIA strategy modules Modules constituting the MELIA strategy are strongly complementary and interconnected as presented in the following sections. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning modules are mostly under the direct coordination of the Program Management Unit. Implementing responsibilities are declined following the programmatic structures (CRP, FPs, clusters). Coordination and alignment between RBM framework and Project-specific frameworks (Bilateral and W3) is foreseen to limit duplications in management and reporting lines. The Impact assessment modules is embedded into the program structure through the cluster CC5.1 – Foresight and impact assessment – that will be in charge of its implementation. In addition, by developing mechanisms and tools to collecting and storing data for impact assessment studies, CC5.1 strengthens the consistency of information produced across the CRP and adds value to data generated at the cluster level and through the monitoring module. 1) Monitoring The RTB monitoring module is organized in two main components: outputs and outcomes. The output monitoring component supports the effective and timely delivery of planned research outputs (e.g. knowledge, tools, technologies, etc.). This component is strongly linked with management of annual budgets and measurement of annual CRP performances (most the annual performance indicators will be tracked using information generated by this component). Tracking of CapDev activities (e.g. # trainings by topic and typology) is also performed here. Output monitoring reposes on the contribution of individual scientists; they provide information and data that will be validated and consolidated at the cluster then at the FP level (See Fig. 3). Figure 2 – Schematic flow of data collection and analysis when monitoring outputs and products 30 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 5 The outcome monitoring component focuses on changes in knowledge, attitude and practices that happen at the next- (research outcomes) and end users levels (development outcomes). Results at (Sub)-IDO levels, corresponding to changes in direct benefits for end users and changes that affect agro- ecosystems, are partially covered by this component and partially addressed by evaluation and impact assessment. Outcome monitoring integrates two main approaches: 1) An indicator-based monitoring that will include gender-sensitive measurements and specific indicators for CapDev. Proposed targets for the (Sub)-IDOs (see Section 1.2 and Performance indicator Metrics tables) are based on the results of an ex-ante impact assessment exercise (See RTB working papers for more details). Indicators were drafted at the cluster level and along the impact pathway in order to provide elements that will be useful when performing impact assessment, theory-based evaluations and contribution analysis. Data collection on indicators related to research and development outcomes is based on the harmonization and consolidation of data produced by projects mapped in RTB. The definition of indicators to assess (Sub)-IDOs is being conducted using a two-pronged approach. First, the CRP is seeking indicators already in existence that are credible, well-recognized, accessible, and being monitored by other better positioned organizations (e.g., FAO, WB). A set of indicators for intermediate development outcomes to which RTB will be contributing is proposed (table 1). Indicators at other levels will be developed during the operational phase after proposal submission. Table 1. SDG framework and indicators under examination (NB. For SDG and SRF coding refer to Fig.4 Sect. 1.2) Indicators - SDG Framework SDG SLO IDO Sub- IDO 1. Proportion of population below $1.25 (PPP) per day (MDG Indicator) 1 1 2. Proportion of population living below national poverty line, by urban/rural (modified MDG Indicator) 1 1 3. Multidimensional Poverty Index 1 1 8. Proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption (MDG Indicator) 2 2 12. Percentage of women, 15-49 years of age, who consume at least 5 out of 10 defined food groups 2 2 2.1 2.1.3 13. Crop yield gap (actual yield as % of attainable yield) 2 1.4 1.4.2 14. Number of agricultural extension workers per 1000 farmers [or share of farmers covered by agricultural extension programs and services] 2 D.1 D.1.4 56. Youth employment rate, by formal and informal sector 8 1.3, B.1 1.3.1 79. Net GHG emissions in the Agriculture, Forest and other Land Use (AFOLU) sector (tCO2e) 13 A.1 85. Annual change in degraded or desertified arable land (% or ha) 15 3 3.3 Second, in cases where there are no suitable indicators, RTB will develop a new indicator with an efficient monitoring system in close collaboration with the flagship teams. Furthermore, RTB will support and seek to use, where possible, standardized indicators established by national partner systems, the MEL CoP and other communities of practice. The methodology used to identify the targets and to measure progress, as well as key assumptions, will be detailed to ensure transparency. To complete the monitoring plan, data collection sources and methodologies, responsibilities and timelines will be identified for each of the indicators. A variety of methodologies are expected to be used 31 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 5 dependent on the indicators, including document reviews, surveys, case studies, meta-analyses, meta- syntheses, adoption studies, impact assessments. In cases where data collection will be under RTB responsibility, table 2 presents the expected frequency of reporting per indicator level (first column), country and cluster stage (bottom line). An illustrative set of methods proposed for each indicator level is presented in the last column. Table 2. Indicators level, frequency of reporting and methods Indicators level Frequency of reporting in years Methods Impact assessment studies and evaluations IDO x 5-10 5 realized in CC5.1. Collaboration with other CRPs particularly in countries selected for site integration Adoption studies and surveys realized in CC5.1 or by projects with dedicated funds. DO x 3-5 3 Data provided by projects and aggregated Collaboration with other CRPs particularly in countries selected for site integration RO 1-2 1-2 1-2 Data provided by projects and aggregated Outputs 1 1 1 Data provided by scientists cluster stage Assembly x Country and pilot Scaling-out Scaling-up 2) A descriptive, participatory monitoring looking at processes and causal relationships among outputs and outcomes. For all the FPs, identification and development of outcome stories will be realized for analyzing both successes and failures (function supported by the IT-platform). In selected clusters, more structured methods (e.g. outcome harvesting, most significant changes) will be tested. Information on partners and partnerships will be considered in both output and outcome components. Output monitoring will focus on: identification and description of partners, documentation and self- assessment of the collaborations. In the outcome component, through annual meetings and online surveys, partners will be regularly asked to assess the quality of the collaboration, their satisfaction with the products and services delivered by RTB, the changes they perceived thanks to the adaptation/adoption of RTB products and services, the foreseen dissemination strategy (to whom and how are they likely to disseminate those products). 2) Evaluation RTB underwent in 2015 a full external evaluation, commissioned by IEA, including both summative and formative aspects (i.e. assessment of research outputs and outcomes, evolution trend of RTB over a four years period (2012-2015) in terms of program design and governance and management arrangements, CRP performances related to cross-cutting issues: gender, capacity development, partnerships and communication and knowledge management). Findings of the evaluation already influenced the pre- proposal writing; final conclusions and recommendations have been considered for the development of the full proposal. Comprehensive CRP evaluations should be coordinated with IEA in 2020/2021 in order to assess the results of Phase II, and key contributions to CGIAR goals and targets and to support key decisions on the extension, resizing and adjustment of the program for a new phase. 32 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 5 A combination of CRP Commissioned External Evaluations (CCEEs), research reviews and evaluative studies is planned to address relevant themes and to prepare and support the IEA external evaluation. Several topics are being considered for CCEEs including the evaluation of one flagship per year under higher levels of W1&2 funding or in alternate years under a lower funding scenario (table 3). Table 3. Candidate sectors and themes considered in the evaluation plan for CCEEs Topics Expected use of evaluation findings Strategic review of NARS breeding • Redefine roles and responsibilities in partnerships; capability for key crops and targeted • adjust or reorient capacity development activities in FP1-2; countries potentially linked with genetic • define a stepwise strategy for the introduction of new breeding methods gains platform and tools Understanding of end-user preferences, • Provide appropriate back-stopping to NARS for cultivar development and orientation and successfulness of release; breeding programs • evaluation of progress in cross center clusters for varietal development in cassava and bananas; • evaluation of the effectiveness of integration and feedback loops between FP1/FP2 and FP2/FP3-4-5 Potential and balance of agronomic and • Assure proper integration and visibility of agronomic aspects in FP3 and soil fertility research in the RTB portfolio across delivery FPs Strategic management of partnerships • Assess existing experiences and best practices within and beyond RTB and for scaling innovations CGIAR; • orient the selection/development of appropriate management approaches and tools FP5: Integration of agri-food and • Review and document changes in research agenda, research management, livelihood systems research into RTB product delivery and outcome achievement; portfolio • Identify and assess synergies created across FPs/CRPs and crops; • Analyze ongoing experiences in order to identify and characterize success factors and challenges 3) Impact assessment The impact assessment module will play a key role in supporting the definition and regular revision of research priorities, in orienting strategic program planning and resource allocation, in fostering better customization of products and technologies for enhanced adoption, and in demonstrating the impact of RTB research. There is increasing recognition that interventions that contribute to complex, indirect causal chains, with multiple partnerships, and with data limitations require a broad range of methods to evaluate effectively, especially at the impact level. Therefore, the CRP will adopt a mixed methods approach to evaluation its performance, including ex-ante and ex-post impact assessments. For the assessment of research priorities, a comprehensive exercise for all RTB crops and technologies, as the one conducted in 2014, is envisioned for every 5 to 7 years as decision-making support tool. Foresight analysis will also be conducted in collaboration with the Global Futures and Strategic Foresight (GFSF) Project of the Policies, Institutes and Markets (PIM) CRP, using the IMPACT modeling framework. Systematic review of FAO data and available literature will be used in order to identify critical factors, including policies and underlying RTB genetic resource base, influencing trends in RTB production, consumption and trade. A central element of the strategy will be the reinforcement of RTB and key partners’ capacities to understand and assess technology adoption an adaptation. A combination of synergistic approaches based on systematic collection and sharing of data is being developed for that. In addition to a strong integration between monitoring and impact assessment and the coordinated definition of variables to 33 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 5 be monitored (see monitoring section), RTB will pursue the fruitful collaboration with Standing Panel on Impact Assessment (SPIA)-led projects, in particular with the Strengthening Impact Assessment in CGIAR (SIAC) Project. At the same time, funding sources other than W1&2 will be mobilized (e.g. BMGF for the development of a database of RTB varietal adoption and the use of DNA-fingerprinting techniques in adoption studies for cassava varieties) and collaboration with other partners promoted (e.g. use of World Bank’s LSMS survey for collecting adoption data in Ethiopia and Malawi). 4) Learning RTB will promote and share its results-oriented culture within and beyond its organizational borders. In particular, RTB will implement a variety of measures to use MELIA findings and information to support learning processes both internally and including partners and stakeholders. These measures includes: • Regular revision and decision-making processes based on evidences and findings provided by monitoring, evaluation and impact assessments during the meetings with the Independent Steering Committee, management committee and in the RTB annual meeting; • Integrated analysis of technical and financial data to inform decision making processes and improve their effectiveness; • Annual reflection sessions organized by flagship project leaders and cluster leaders, each one at his/her level, and including key stakeholders in order to revise the results achieved (both using qualitative and quantitative findings) and agree on the adjustments needed in their ToC and operational plans; • Improvement of knowledge management and sharing through the IT platform (see section above) and with strengthened coordination with centers’ communication and knowledge management units; • Documenting lessons learned and best practices and facilitate learning across teams/crops/clusters through cross-cutting clusters; • Improving an internal mechanism for incentivizing good performances in line with the one that would be adopted by the CGIAR System Office to assess the CRP performances. 3. Budget Allocation to MELIA Resources required to implement a robust and credible MELIA strategy have been included accordingly in the CRP's budget. For all the elements of the strategy, a budget of 4% of CRP budget has been allocated across all windows. This allocation would cover: • development and implementation of a stronger monitoring and reporting interoperable platform (mostly W1&2); • management of data collection measures in various geographies to implement the monitoring plan effectively (W1&2 + Bilateral and W3 funding); • annual conduct of a CCEE, which is estimated at USD 300,000 of consulting fees per evaluation (mostly W1&2); • MEL specialists to provide MEL expertise to CRP and project leads, build capacity across the lead centers and partners, and coordinate the implementation of the MEL modules (W1&2). The impact assessment module will be funded through CC5.1 in FP5 (all funding windows). 34 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 ANNEX 6. Linkages with other CRPs and site integration CONTENT: Template 1: Overview of Inter-CRP Collaboration: Provide and Receive Template 2a: Partnerships with other CRPs (activities, mode, geographies and outcomes sought) Template 2b: Plans for site integration in CGIAR target countries TEMPLATE 1: OVERVIEW OF INTER-CRP COLLABORATION: PROVIDE AND RECEIVE Table 1: RTB collaboration matrix with Global Integrating CRPs Partner RTB-FP1: RTB-FP2: RTB-FP3: RTB-FP4: RTB-FP5: CRP Enhanced Productive varieties & Resilient crops Nutritious food & added value Improving livelihoods at genetic quality seed scale resources RTB receives: RTB provides: -- RTB provides: RTB provides: • Guidance on • Descriptions of seed • Insights into opportunities for • Foresight data and analysis market trends systems and policy reducing postharvest losses and related to RTB commodities and future needs improve utilization of waste • Ex-ante assessments for needs RTB receives: across RTB value chains through RTB interventions and • Guidance in seed policy postharvest innovations investments advocacy (with FP5) • Data and lessons from • Scaling innovations diversifying markets for RTB • Impact of RTB seed system crops interventions which entail RTB receives: policy support • Post-harvest losses framework RTB receives: and metrics • Training on foresight • Methodological guidance for analysis assessing the potential of value • Global prospective on chain interventions focusing on foresight modelling women and the youth • Value chain tools, methods and assessments -- RTB provides : -- RTB provides: RTB provides: • Breeding/germplasm • Insights from nutrition-focused • Projections & trends in development to provide RTB value chain development, technology impacts, nutrient dense varieties food processing, food industry, 35 AG RICULTURE POLICIES, INSTITUTIONS AND MARKETS (PIM) FOR NUTRITION RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Partner RTB-FP1: RTB-FP2: RTB-FP3: RTB-FP4: RTB-FP5: CRP Enhanced Productive varieties & Resilient crops Nutritious food & added value Improving livelihoods at genetic quality seed scale resources • Delivery in target value and assessing nutrition and production, consumption, chains and Evidence/ health outcomes and utilization of RTB crops Advocacy • Data and lessons from RTB receives: • Value chain nutrition-focused behavior • Insight on role of RTB as coordination, food change interventions and policy part of whole diet processing, food advocacy approaches industry • Joint impact studies of • Guidance on regional and RTB receives biofortified cassava and population nutritional • Nutritional efficacy and sweetpotato needs bioavailability studies RTB receives: • Assessing RTB value • Methodologies for food chains for nutrition and systems analysis for healthier health diets • Insight on nutrition and health outcomes when RTB are combined with other nutrient- rich foods • Assessing RTB value chains for nutrition and health outcomes • Framework for assessing the impacts of biofortification RTB provides RTB provides RTB provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: • Climate-smart • Climate-Smart Breeding • Climate-Smart farming • Climate-Smart postharvest • RTB Climate-Smart breeding tools • Climate Smart Seed RTB receives: practices intensification practices and methods systems • Climate modelling to • Data on postharvest losses and • RTB diversification options RTB receives: forecast future impacts GHG footprint of RTB value for improved resilience of • Climate RTB receives: on biotic and abiotic chains tree- crop and cereal- modelling to • Climate modelling to factors affecting RTB RTB receives: dominated farming systems forecast forecast future impacts crop production • Climate modelling to forecast RTB receives: future impacts on biotic and abiotic future impacts on postharvest • Climate suitability maps on biotic and factors affecting RTB conditions • Model insights in climate abiotic factors crop production • Methodologies for assessing change vulnerability affecting RTB GHG footprint of RTB value 36 CCAFS RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Partner RTB-FP1: RTB-FP2: RTB-FP3: RTB-FP4: RTB-FP5: CRP Enhanced Productive varieties & Resilient crops Nutritious food & added value Improving livelihoods at genetic quality seed scale resources crop chains, including postharvest (environment x crop x production losses and waste livelihood) • Linkages with Climate Smart Villages -- -- RTB provides: RTB provides: • Quantitative assessments of • best practices and cost- cassava and other RTB waste benefit information for RTB and its environmental and production for integration water footprint into design of integrated RTB receives: landscape interventions • Research data and business RTB receives: models for resource recovery • soil and plant nutrient from cassava and other RTB analytical methods, digital waste. mapping of soil constraints, and risk-based landscape- wide approaches to predictive agronomy 37 WLE RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Table 2: RTB collaboration matrix with AFS CRPs CRP: Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Partner FP1: FP2: FP3: FP4: FP 5: CRP Enhanced genetic Productive varieties & Resilient crops Nutritious food & added Improving livelihoods at scale resources quality seed value RTB receives: RTB receives and provides: RTB receives and provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: See Genetic Gains • Varieties suitable for • Varieties suitable for • Methods and models for • Sustainable intensification of Platform system integration e.g. system integration e.g. scaling up nutritious RTB RTB cropping systems with intercropping, relay intercropping, relay foods that can be improved synergies with other cropping and rotation cropping and rotation extended to include crop and livestock enterprises systems, dual purpose systems, dual purpose other crops and animal for more resilient livelihoods (food/fodder) (food/fodder) source foods • Insights in crop intensification • See Genetic Gains • Data, technologies, and drivers, farm typologies and Platform management guidelines targeting technology options INTER AFS for reducing postharvest • Institutional innovation COLLABOR losses and improve waste options that strengthen ATION utilization that can be technology uptake, adapted to other crops particularly for women/youth and animal source foods • M&EL approaches and lessons RTB receives: RTB receives: • Insights on reducing • Insights on sustainable postharvest losses and intensification in relation to developing nutrition- crops other than or focused value chains intercropped with RTB from other crops and animal source foods RTB provides: RTB provides: • Data, lessons, and joint • Options for crop-livestock-fish research opportunities integrations for developing RTB and • Options for fish to fill key gaps fish value chains to meet FISH in ‘whole-diet’ approaches to nutrition needs, including tackle malnutrition. novel products combining RTB receives: biofortified RTB and fish • Options for integrating with RTB receives: fish production and value chains 38 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 CRP: Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Partner FP1: FP2: FP3: FP4: FP 5: CRP Enhanced genetic Productive varieties & Resilient crops Nutritious food & added Improving livelihoods at scale resources quality seed value • Data and lessons from • Opportunities for youth to promoting fish for engage in enterprises nutrition that can be adapted to and/or combined with nutritious RTB foods • Information on feed quality of aqua feed and feed ingredients. NIRS equations for phenotyping RTB provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: • Cultivars for phenotypic • Technologies and market • Access to research sites in RTB testing. Data on linkages for improving areas to assess integrated genomics, genetics of use of RTB, including approaches to livelihoods traits and management waste, as animal feed improvement • Access to seed RTB receives: • Trade off analysis and options distribution systems • Data and lessons from for intensification of RTB crop- LIVESTOCK RTB receives: utilization of RTB as livestock systems • Information on feed animal feed RTB receives: supply and demand • Information on projected • Livestock options and feed scenarios; data on demand for RTB as requirements that guide nutritive value of crop ingredient in animal feed technological and institutional residues of different arrangements for livelihoods varieties/cultivars and improvement promising feed and fodder value chains RTB provides: RTB provides: • Rotation and inter-crop/ • RTB-based livelihoods analysis FTA companion crops. • Diversification options in • Access to seed cocoa-coffee systems. distribution systems 39 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 CRP: Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Partner FP1: FP2: FP3: FP4: FP 5: CRP Enhanced genetic Productive varieties & Resilient crops Nutritious food & added Improving livelihoods at scale resources quality seed value RTB receives: • Options for improved access • Information on RTB to and control of RTB integration in agro- enterprises in coffee-cocoa forestry systems cash systems. • Intensification options for farmers in forest margins to reduce deforestation rate. • Banana/Plantain intercropping in coffee/cocoa systems. RTB receives: • Forest and tree crop-based livelihoods analysis • Reducing impacts on forests and optimizing production in agro-forestry systems • Foresight analysis RTB provides & RTB RTB provides & RTB receives: receives: • Rotation and inter-crop/ DCL/MAIZE/ • Rotation and inter-crop/ companion crops RICE/WHEA T companion crops. • Livelihood analysis tools. • RTB-legume mixtures for dietary diversity 40 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Table 3: RTB collaboration matrix with Platforms CRP: Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Partner Platform FP1: FP2: FP3: FP4: FP 5: Enhanced genetic resources Productive varieties & quality Resilient crops Nutritious food & Improving livelihoods at scale seed added value Genebank RTB provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: Platform • Value enhancement of • Released varieties with value • Enhanced use and • Enhanced use • Impact assessments of the germplasm collections to end users impact value to and impact value value of genetic diversity and • Mining biodiversity for trait • Enhanced use of genebank genebank material to genebank genebanks discovery material • Enhanced material • Enhanced understanding of • Pre-breeding materials • Feedback on user preferred understanding of • Enhanced gender and youth • Data on use and availability of traits traits for biotic and understanding of components of germplasm genetic resources under • Information on demanded abiotic challenges nutritionally use and conservation different policy regimes traits important traits • Pathway for better • Baseline monitoring of in situ RTB receives: RTB receives: • Tools for integration of national genetic diversity • Conservation method of • Diversity for screening entities in genetic resources RTB receives: non-released RTB-bred capturing alleles nutritionally conservation • Access to genetic diversity material for biotic and important • Database & information • Curated conservation of RTB abiotic resistances components in RTB receives: management released varieties and tolerances genebank • Enriched understanding of • Association of trait data to • Distribution into the future • Curated accessions the contribution of genetic accessions of RTB-released varieties conservation of resources in the impact • Select germplasm subsets to through an online database RTB released RTB receives: pathway facilitate screening • Access to genetic diversity varieties • Enhanced use • Policy guidance in germplasm • Database & information Distribution of RTB- and impact value germplasm flow and • Enhanced user-interactive management released varieties to genebank exchange database for targeting through an online material • Enhanced options and new accessions database • Enhanced germplasm through better • Enhanced policy clarity for association of integration of the genebanks use and exchange of genetic nutritionally in national genetic resources resources important conservation • Link to understanding on farm attributes in diversity to help target genebank conservation efforts accessions 41 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 CRP: Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Partner Platform FP1: FP2: FP3: FP4: FP 5: Enhanced genetic resources Productive varieties & quality Resilient crops Nutritious food & Improving livelihoods at scale seed added value Genetic Gains RTB provides: RTB provides: Platform • CapDev needs • Feedback on GGP tool use • Approaches and metrics for and usefulness in enhancing assessing genetic gain breeding activities and • User feedback on GGP tool progress • Information about, or code RTB receives: for bioinformatics tools for • Generic tools and services to genotyping support breeding program • Bioinformatic tools to share excellence and accelerated • Approaches/cases for learning phenotyping • Procurement and • Databases at related to target coordination of cutting edge germplasm and high-throughput RTB receives: precision phenotyping and • Virtual & face-to-face CapDev technical support for • Practical toolbox to support applying in breeding breeding excellence. programs • Standardized approaches for assessing genetic gain • Documented use cases and best practices for genotyping and phenotyping • Procurement and coordination of common genotyping/sequencing services and high-throughput precision phenotyping and technical support • Bioinformatics and data management tools & services, including interconnectivity and interoperability 42 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 CRP: Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Partner Platform FP1: FP2: FP3: FP4: FP 5: Enhanced genetic resources Productive varieties & quality Resilient crops Nutritious food & Improving livelihoods at scale seed added value Big Data platform RTB provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: • Open access to genotyping • Open access to genotyping, • Data collected (HH data, crop data phenotyping and response data, • Open access to in situ germplasm evaluation and environmental data) databases selection data • Data analysis (HH typologies, RTB receives: • Open access to RTB seed drivers of adoption, • Data management and system information technology targeting) analytical tools databases • Data collection tools • Data collection tools, e.g. RTB receives: RTB receives: crowd-sourcing and data • Data management and • Aggregated data collected mining analytical tools • Big data analysis tools Data collection tools, e.g. • Citizen science tools (incl. crowd-sourcing and data phone apps) mining Gender platform RTB provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: RTB provides: • Gender-differentiated • Characterization of gender- • Baseline studies • Gender • Gender-specific needs of end target traits for RTB crops differentiated preferences on gender roles in differences in users and how RTB across the breeding for traits and their RTB-based RTB trait innovations are adapted for pipeline. consequences to help cropping systems preferences by intensification, diversification RTB receives: breeding strategies and and household consumers, food and dietary improvement to • Norms and Agency analysis ensure gender inclusive typologies. processors, and end users’ needs and guidance by geography access to better seed. • Gender and youth household level • Understanding of how global • Foresight on policy, RTB receives: local knowledge food preparers and local trends affect education and norms • Norms and Agency analysis on disease and caregivers gender relations and gender affecting gender and youth and guidance by geography management to • Feedbacks on equity on technology access and • Foresight on policy, develop gender RTB receives: acceptance education and norms information and responsive value • Support for integrating affecting gender and communications chain tools, gender to create strategic technology access and strategies on safe methods and partnerships with national, acceptance pest and disease communication regional and global control methods materials for organizations for policy • RTB receives: advocacy and influencing for 43 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 CRP: Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Partner Platform FP1: FP2: FP3: FP4: FP 5: Enhanced genetic resources Productive varieties & quality Resilient crops Nutritious food & Improving livelihoods at scale seed added value • Foresight on gender equitable women’s empowerment policy, education outcomes issues related to the cases of and norms RTB receives: RTB innovations affecting gender • Synthesized and technology knowledge and access and sharing on how acceptance gender inequalities affect agri-food systems 44 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 TEMPLATE 2A: PARTNERSHIPS WITH OTHER CRPS (ACTIVITIES, MODE, GEOGRAPHIES AND OUTCOMES SOUGHT) Table 1: RTB collaboration matrix with Global Integrating CRPs Partner ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING CRP ROLE COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED VALUE; CRP (AND FLAGSHIP) MODE TARGET COUNTRIES Foresight Contribute with crop models (FP5) • Use the International Model for Leadership by Improved alignment of RTB Policy Analysis of Agricultural PIM; cost sharing investment with market Commodities and Trade (IMPACT) Joint (ongoing) opportunities model to generate mid- and long- Complementary Global term projections of supply and (Ongoing) demand of RTB crops Joint (to be explored Ex-ante Run ex-ante impact assessment • Use the IMPACT model to enhance Joint (ongoing) More robust ex-ante assessment models for promising RTB ex-ante impact assessment of RTB assessment, with technologies based on rates of return technologies in a holistic model, information on indicators of (FP5) including multiple commodities economic welfare and food (Future Harvest+) security in more continuous manner; Global Scaling innovations Generation of household, scaling and • Complementary analysis and Joint (to be Framework for learning other typologies (FP5) to improve RTB development of a typology of value explored across multiple value chains scaling strategies in FP2-FP4 chain-focused scaling models and and improving scaling mechanisms, investment schemes strategy; and a framework for assessing Global scaling outcomes and identifying best bet options • Knowledge sharing and scaling through value chain hubs, across commodities, CRPs and partners Value chain tools, • Share lessons with others through • Leads and coordinates learning Joint (ongoing) • Improved tools and methods and PIM value chains platform around the development of methods and accelerated assessments • Action learning on tool development approaches, methodologies and learning. in specific contexts to strengthen tools for value chain development • Synergies across multiple the design, implementation and and scaling (FP3) value chains, connect assessment of interventions aimed • Developing and validating research to key policy at inclusive and efficient value innovative mechanisms to promote decisions and deliver large 45 POLICIES INSTITUTIONS AND MARKETS) RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Partner ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING CRP ROLE COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED VALUE; CRP (AND FLAGSHIP) MODE TARGET COUNTRIES chains co-investment of public and private development outcomes as • Develop the concept of coaching in actors in innovation in different measured against the SRF gender and value chains (FP2, FP4, crop value chains (FP3) framework FP5) • Expanding the use of gender- Around the emerging Value responsive versions of Participatory Chain hubs in South America Market Chain Analysis (PMCA), and West and East Africa 5Capitals, LINK and other value chain methods, and advocacy work in relation to the findings generated by these (FP3) Post-harvest losses Apply framework to evaluate losses Develop framework to evaluate the Joint (ongoing) Consistent method for framework and improve post-harvest extent and sources of post-harvest measuring post-harvest management (FP4) losses/methodology to measure losses and guiding research postharvest losses along different investment to area of stages of the value chain that can be highest pay-off; replicated across regions and crops/ Uganda and Peru differentiating losses in terms of quantity, quality and value (FP3) Seed system Identify seed system interventions Assessing appropriate and effective Joint core and W3 Enhance viability of seed analysis and seed markets where policy has roles for in varietal development and funded systems through more critical influence (FP2, FP5) the production and distribution of appropriate engagement of seed and planting materials ( FP2, public, private, and FP5) community actors; Nigeria Gender analysis • Apply, adapt and improve guidelines • Developing guidelines and tools for Joint (ongoing) Improved uniformity and for sex disaggregation of data in collecting sex-disaggregated data at quality of sex-disaggregated baseline and other surveys (FP5) household, SME and overall value data across CRPs; • Research, capacity building, and chain level and integrate feedback Global south-south knowledge-sharing on from RTB (FP3) gender sensitive value chain • Research, capacity building, and development (FP5) south-south knowledge-sharing on gender sensitive value chain development (FP3) 46 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Partner ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING CRP ROLE COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED VALUE; CRP (AND FLAGSHIP) MODE TARGET COUNTRIES Geospatial Geospatial mapping with RTBMaps Collaboration through the CGIAR- Ongoing Cost saving and access to big mapping (FP5) wide geospatial working group for data; common ontology and Global interoperability of databases Breeding/germplas • Leads overall breeding program of Leads high-throughput diagnostics Alignment of W3 Ensure that nutritional traits m development biofortified crops (NIRS platform) for vitamin levels and projects embedded in varieties with • Supports and uses high- throughput other quality traits (minerals, sugars, good agronomic and diagnostics for vitamin levels and dry matter, etc.) consumer-preferred traits; other quality traits (FP2) Global Nutritional efficacy User of information in breeding Primary responsibility for studies Ensure nutritional efficacy in and bioavailability programs (FP2) released varieties; studies Global Delivery in target Leads on key agriculture value chain Leads on the nutrition evidence and Advocacy for nutrition value chains and delivery and contributes to cost public delivery related to improving friendly value chains; Evidence/ effectiveness studies (FP2, FP4) nutrition and health in target Global Advocacy populations Value chain • Leads facilitation with key value • Study incentives and arrangements Broad based coalition for coordination, food chains, with a particular focus on as they relate to consumption and improving nutrition processing, food gender relations as RTB improving nutritional quality responsive value chain industry, and commercialization increases (including gender), standards for coordination; assessing nutrition • Joint work on processing and foods biofortified products, and food Global and health (FP2, FP4) safety outcomes • Joint work on processing and foods. • Policies affecting value chains, economics of value chain transformation (e.g., scaling up to supermarkets, etc.) (with PIM) 47 AG RICULTURE FOR NUTRITION AND HEALTH (A4NH) RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Partner ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING CRP ROLE COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED VALUE; CRP (AND FLAGSHIP) MODE TARGET COUNTRIES Assessing RTB Shares in implementation of • Contribute with tools and methods Program evaluation capacity value chains for assessment methods, contributing a for assessments of nutritional of A4NH helps RTB learn nutrition and crop-specific and place based quality, food safety, and health from the implementation health perspective (FP2, FP4, FP5) benefits and scaling processes to • Contribute with tools and methods strengthen impact; for value chain assessment (with Global PIM) Climate-Smart Utilize foresight, metrics and models Develop Foresight, metrics and Joint (planned) Co-invest to develop climate Breeding to improve selection and definition of models for climate-smart breeding sensitive breeding strategies, traits (FP1,FP2) with (CCAFS F1); especially trait prioritization (CCAFS models & metrics); Global Climate modelling Incorporate effects of climate change Joint research on modelling climate Joint (ongoing in Improved understanding of to forecast future in insect crop life cycle modelling, and change effects on pests and diseases Climate Smart climate change impacts on impacts on biotic disease models (e.g. Blightcast); (FP2, and on adaptation in the applied Villages in pests and diseases and and abiotic factors FP3) Climate Smart Village approaches Tanzania, success of control measures; affecting RTB crop (CCAFS F2) Uganda; planned East Africa production in other locations pending funding); Modelling planned, pending funding) Climate-Smart Incorporation of climate change in • Shared intervention sites, Joint (ongoing); • Mutual technology farming research on resilience in cropping technology transfer, shared farm for loss and waste validation from a systems systems across climate gradients (FP2, system diagnostics and needs – joint (planned) and/or resilience research FP3, FP5) assessments; shared M&EL perspective. systems; (CCAFS F2) • Co-location of scientists; • Improving the resilience of maize- Joint investments in tools based farming systems through development, partnering, RTB diversification (CCAFS F2) and scaling. • Links to global platform on loss and Climate Smart Villages, waste in relation to climate change Vietnam, SSA (CCAFS F3). 48 CCAFS RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Partner ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING CRP ROLE COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED VALUE; CRP (AND FLAGSHIP) MODE TARGET COUNTRIES Foresight on Includes climate change in ex ante Modelling, horizon scanning and Joint (planned) Enhanced foresight climate change impact assessment (FP5) foresight analysis, policy analysis considering climate change (CCAFS F1) in RTB Landscape RTB are conducting multilocational Scientific and technical advisory servic A dvisory services, Development of restoration trials on cassava agronomy and will and analytical services in use of low soil-plant generalizable predictive (Development of conduct soil and plant sampling., SE cost, high throughput soil and plant analytical relationships on response on predictive Asia (FP3, FP5) spectral analytical methods and services, joint cassava to soil variability and agronomy available digital mapping products for data analysis nutrient inputs contributing approaches at developing evidence-based approache to integration of agronomic landscape/national to predicting agronomic responses to practices into landscape level based on nutrient inputs considering landscape context; spectral diagnostic variability. and digital soil Countries in Africa to be mapping methods decided upon for nutrient South East Asia management of Vietnam, Thailand cassava in sub- Saharan Africa) Co development of Adapt and validate technology for Ecosystem level approaches for More efficient processing business models waste and water management with managing processing waste and and utilization of waste from on wastewater small scale processors (FP4) water (with Livestock) small scale cassava utilization linked to processing; cassava processing, Nigeria and for integration into improvement of ecosystem services 49 WLE RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Table 2: RTB collaboration matrix with AFS CRPs Partner ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING CRP ROLE COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED CRP (AND FLAGSHIP) MODE VALUE; TARGET COUNTRIES User and contributor to shared platforms (FP1, FP2) Sustainable • Use multi crop frameworks to guide Shared frameworks and approaches Improved integration of intensification research around e.g. residue use in a for full (multi) purpose crops: e.g. innovation processes in incl systems whole farm context and multipurpose SP improving fodder resources from multi crop context, and research, e.g. as food, feed and cover crop to reduce crop residues assessments of livelihoods soil erosion resilience through • Modeling diversified farming systems. scenario simulation; Joint analysis of crop integration. Joint Global design of land and soil management (FP5) Genetics linked Utilize as basis for CapDev, coordination BECA as genetics-related training Improved critical mass, Cap Dev with Breeding Platform (FP1, FP2) hub for all AFS-CRPs for reduction in costs; Global M&EL Member of community of practice user of • Joint M&EL framework, methods Faster, more precise, shared/interoperable M&EL platform (FP5) and tools (e.g. e-household), genetic gain, more interoperability of platforms structured variety and (ongoing preparations 2014-16), trait pipelines; ideally common platform Global • Platform: Metrics for breeding cycle, e.g. how to monitor progress on Targeting & Active participant, link to RTB maps (FP5) Renew GIS Community of Practice Shared framework for prioritizing analysis/ setting priorities; Global Multifunctiona Integrating RTB crops into aquatic Multifunctional landscapes, with Improved resilience of l landscapes production systems (FP5) more resilient and ecologically RTB production sustainable RTB and aquatic systems; production systems Bangladesh, Cambodia, Zambia, 50 FISH INTER AFS COLLABORATION RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Partner ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING CRP ROLE COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED CRP (AND FLAGSHIP) MODE VALUE; TARGET COUNTRIES Improving use Provide cassava waste processed in Test the bioconversion efficiency of Joint, FISH from Tanzania of RTB crops different ways different forms of cassava waste bilateral, IITA bilateral for feed (including variations in pre- with Enable Youth processing the waste) and the Training Center bioactive effects on the growth of crustaceans (prawns and crabs) and fish (tilapia and catfish) Ecosystem Incorporate aquatic production as Ecosystem service trade-offs and Improved alignment of services and dimension of trade-offs analysis in synergies (e.g. nutrition) due to research with full range improved livelihoods (FP5) expansion of RTB or aquatic of livelihood options; nutrition production systems Zambia, Bangladesh Foresight work Shared work on foresight linked to site Methods and tools for foresight Foresight work integration (FP5) work in relation to climate change considers whole and other drivers of change livelihood context; Bangladesh Improving use Selection of sweetpotato varieties suited to A cross-CRP platform linking the Ongoing, joint funding Expanded utilization of of RTB crops feed and validation of options for utilizing Livestock CRP with several of the all windows, expand RTB crops and their for feed cassava peel and other waste from RTB crop other agri-food systems CRPs will be with systems residues for feed; production and processing for feed (FP4, established aimed at improving innovation fund Uganda, Nigeria FP5) fodder resources from crop residues. This work will be guided by the Livestock CRP but embedded in the trait discovery and crop breeding flagships of Maize, Wheat Rice, RTB, DCLAFS using the “full purpose crop” concept that concomitantly, improves food, feed and fodder traits of crops with no additional land and water need. 51 LIVE-STOCK RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Partner ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING CRP ROLE COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED CRP (AND FLAGSHIP) MODE VALUE; TARGET COUNTRIES Reducing • Intensifying RTB to reduce environmental • Framework for managing RTB Opportunities and Sustainable impacts on impact (FP3) systems to minimize impacts on linkages firmed up in intensification of RTB forests and • Banana cultivars and their management forest environments (FP4?) joint proposal systems; optimizing linked to specific agro-forestry systems • Optimizing management of banana development using West Africa production in (FP3, FP5) production in agro-forestry systems innovation agro-forestry • Optimizing management of banana systems (FP2) fund (w1&2) and system production in agro-forestry systems (FP3) other resources Livelihood Incorporate tree crops in livelihood analysis Livelihood systems analysis on mixed Opportunities and Better targeting of analysis (FP5) tree-crop and RTB crops (FP2) linkages firmed up in research; joint proposal Global development using systems innovation fund (w1&2) and other resources Rotation and • Adapt potato varieties and their • Grain legumes and dryland cereals Opportunities and Exchange inter-crop/ management as rotation crop with grain varieties and agronomic practices linkages firmed up in tools/methods for companion legumes and dryland cereals adapted to intercropping joint proposal systems analysis; crops. • Sweetpotato varieties for intercropping • Guide selection of best RTB crops development using Asia and for enhancing the quality of cereal and varieties for rotation systems innovation residues as animal feed (FP2, FP4, FP5) fund (w1&2) and other resources Rotation and • Adapt RTB varieties and their • Maize varieties and agronomic Opportunities and Strengthen resilience of inter-crop/ management as rotation crop or inter practices adapted to intercropping linkages firmed up in maize-based systems companion crop with maize or rotation with RTB crops joint proposal with RTB crops; crops. • Sweetpotato varieties for intercropping • Guide selection of best RTB crops development using Africa, LAC and for enhancing the quality of cereal and varieties for rotation systems innovation residues as animal feed (FP2 and FP5) fund (W1&2) and other resources 52 MAIZE DCL FTA RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Partner ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING CRP ROLE COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED CRP (AND FLAGSHIP) MODE VALUE; TARGET COUNTRIES Rotation Adapt RTB varieties and their management • Integration potato and Opportunities and Integrated approach to crops/compani as rotation and inter crop with rice including sweetpotato in rice based systems linkages firmed up in resilient cropping; on crops. with salinity tolerance (FP2, FP3, FP5) including those susceptible to joint proposal India, Bangladesh, flooding development using China; West & East • Guide selection of best RTB crops systems innovation Africa (in particular in and varieties for rotation fund (w1&2) and Côte d’Ivoire, Nigeria, • Seek linkages to work in inland other resources Tanzania and Uganda valleys and uplands including joint for inland valley PhDs on farming systems analyses systems) of trade-offs and complementarities between rice and RTB enterprises under changing climate and population pressure. Rotation Adapt potato varieties and their • Wheat varieties and agronomic Opportunities and Integration potato in crops/compani management as rotation crop with wheat practices adapted to intercropping linkages firmed up in wheat based systems; on crops (FP2, FP5) • Guide selection of best RTB crops joint proposal Asia and varieties for rotation development using systems innovation fund (w1&2) and other resources 53 WHEAT RICE RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Table 3: RTB collaboration matrix with Platforms ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING PLATFORM COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED VALUE; (AND FLAGSHIP) ROLE MODE TARGET COUNTRIES Value Greater efficiency in use of Partnering with the genebanks Reduced time and resources enhancement genetic resources collections for accession-based association and greater availability for in of germplasm through facilitated use of of traits of interest for RTB use and incorporation of collections accession-based traits for traits of interest from selection of germplasm (FP1, germplasm collections into FP2) improved varieties; Global Mining Unique, novel and variant forms Collaborative research to Identification of biodiversity for of important traits are identify accessions and traits genes/genetic regions that trait discovery uncovered from germplasm with novel traits important for can encode traits of value collections (FP1- FP4) achieving RTB goals. that can be incorporated into elite varieties; Global Pre-breeding Genebanks will collaborate with Combined activities to integrate Making genes/traits available RTB to source, evaluate and gene/traits of interest into for breeding programs which propagate wild or non-adapted germplasm that can be readily would otherwise be too time sources for germplasm adopted and used in breeding consuming or difficult to use; enhancement and pre-breeding. programs. Global (FP1) Database & Develop accession-specific trait Shared breeding and genebank Silico selection of genebank information associations readily searchable databases through a public accessions greatly increasing management in a public database (FP1 - FP4) portal in such a way that the efficiency of the selection accession can be selected by of genebank materials for phenotype or genotype breeding programs; Global 54 GENEBANKS Partner Platform RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 ACTIVITY RTB ROLE COLLABORATING PLATFORM COLLABORATION OUTPUT; ADDED VALUE; (AND FLAGSHIP) ROLE MODE TARGET COUNTRIES Shared User and contributor to shared Expand Genomic and Open- Interact via BCoP Increased critical mass and genotyping, platforms (FP1, FP2) source Breeding Informatics and Platform use of big data; high- • Share bioinformatics tools Initiative (GOBII) guidelines for access Global throughput developed for clonally • Continue to promote use of to services phenotyping, propagated crops, adapted for shared platforms: e.g. and polyploidy and heterozygosity. Integrated Breeding Platform bioinformatics and CGIAR Big Data Platform platforms Germplasm • Hub for clonally propagated • Shared phenotyping platforms Interact via BCoP Reduction in cost of service improvement crops (FP1, FP2) and Platform provision; • Share breeding tools guidelines for access Global developed for clonally to services propagated crops, adapted for polyploidy and heterozygosity. 55 GENETIC GAIN Partner Platform RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 TEMPLATE 2B: PLANS FOR SITE INTEGRATION IN CGIAR TARGET COUNTRIES Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country ++ countries Bangladesh In Bangladesh, for over 3 years 7 CGIAR centers representing over A CIP representative attended the formal meeting and a bilateral Craig Meisner 7 CRPs have established a CGIAR Advisory Committee. Through meeting was organized with Worldfish leader in Bangladesh. (WorldFish) this venue all CGIAR centers plus AVRDC and IFDC meet with our RTB, through the CIP staff have maintained regular contact with NARS and Ministry officials twice a year. We have met twice in other Centers/CRPs in Bangladesh for coordination purposes and 2015 and will meet 2 times in 2016. All details for this integration related to research collaboration. The most recent organized by as well as 4 CAC minutes are posted on the CIP in September 2015 at which IRRI, Worldfish and CIMMYT http://gcard3.cgiar.org/national-consultations/bangladesh/ participated to discuss future collaboration, especially the potential for expanding the role of potato in cereal-based systems. This was followed up by CIP’s organization of an international workshop on potato agriculture in February 2016, at which IRRI and CIMMYT staff were represented. The workshop held in February focused on sustainable intensification and diversification of cereal-based systems and it set the groundwork for cross-CRP collaboration. Overlap of sites in target districts of southern Bangldesh (Kulna, Barisal, Patuakali, Faridpur) due to joint funding by USAID Feed the Future. Current preparation of a one year USAID interim grant also focuses in these overlapping locations. Strong collaboration by RTB with BRAC, an international NGO based in Bangladesh for implementation of potato and sweetpotato projects. They also provide a common NGO platform through which RTB also collaborates with AAS and Worldfish and other organizations operating in Bangladesh. Even before the Consortium-driven integration process, RTB through CIP has been a member of a CGIAR coordination group linked to their common implementation of Feed the Future projects. Outside of meetings convened through USAID, RTB has also participated in multi-lateral coordination meetings led by the biggest CGIAR Centers (Worldfish and IRRI). CIP has worked with 56 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country Worldfish to expand the area of the OFSP and vegetables to integrated homestead systems involving fish ponds. Currently CIP is the only RTB Center operating in Bangladesh. We are coordinating with CIAT about possibilities of expanding work on potato and SP to cassava, which is a small but potentially growing part of the agri-food systems. Within CIP, the Country Manager has been in close coordination with both CIP’s Regional Director and the Leader of Social and health sciences in relation to actions and partnerships. More recently CIP’s leaders of SO1 and SO2 Programs have taken a stronger role in coordinating strategy and future actions. Ethiopia The Ethiopia CGIAR country collaboration and site integration As part of presentation CG centers presented their activities and Siboniso Moyo (ILRI) process is coordinated by a committee representing 11 CGIAR relevant CRPs in the marketplace. CIP presented its ongoing Centers (Bioversity, CIAT, CIFOR, CIMMYT, CIP, ICARDA, ICRAF, activities and RTB through posters. ICRISAT, IFPRI, ILRI and IWMI) that are based in Ethiopia plus 3 While root and tuber research activities are well coordinated by others (Africa Rice, IITA and IRRI) who have no offices in the the national research system via national commodity projects, country, 10 CRP focal points, (Climate Change, DCLAFS, Forest and root and tuber related research and development including Agro Forests, Livestock, Maize, Nutrition and Health, PIM, Rice, emergency activities are poorly coordinated and often Roots Tubers & Bananas and WLS&E) and the Genebank platform. inadequately technically backstopped in the country. There are This is the larger group that receives all communications on this few initiatives which are trying to coordinate both research and process and meets quarterly for those who are based here to development works which includes Potato Coalition and Potato coincide with the existing Heads of Institutes meetings. This Platforms. CIP played important role towards formation of potato committee also helps with data collection (eg. mapping of coalition. The primary objective of potato coalition is to promote ongoing projects in Ethiopia and baselining on the 10 principles of roots and tubers through agriculture extension packages. site integration). Out of this we formed a smaller group of six (3 Centers and 3 CRPs) which meets more often to plan for meetings There is also a Roots and Tubers Working Group that aims to and the process in more detail with the help of ILRI strengthen the coordination and harmonization of roots and Communications and Knowledge Management team which tubers-related interventions - both development and emergency facilitates and helps capture the notes of meetings. We are in the related interventions - that will result in the adoption of common process of activating a wiki for our communications. At strategic standards and approaches that will strengthen the root and tuber points of the planning process we have brought in the Agricultural sub-sector over time and therefore improve the well-being of poor Transformation Agency and the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural smallholder farmers. Through this initiative it is proposed that Working Group will contribute to both increased production and 57 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country Research to help us better prepare for the national consultation productivity and therefore result in increased household income process. and improved food and nutrition security. Some key activities to date include: The USAID funded Better Potato for a Better Life and IrishAid • Creating a database of our major partners/collaborators funded Scaling out sweetpotato and potato led interventions for nutrition and food security are mapped under RTB. But, both • Mapping CGIAR Center and CRP work in Ethiopia (November projects may contribute to A4NH. However, these projects are 2015). Continuing to refine. ending in December 31, 2016. • Engaging in partners’ (ATA, RED&FS) national consultations Further discussion needed among different CRPs. CIP is a part of a on alignment to GTP II (November 2015 – January 2016). large project called Africa Rising (led by ILRI and funded by USAID) • Conducting National Consultation Meeting (11 December which is being implemented through different livelihoods system 2015) approach. The livelihoods systems indicate that RTB can be overlapped with Maize and wheat and Climate Change, • Different CRPs/Flagships are conducting focused group Agriculture and Food Security CRPs. consultations (January-March 2016) CIP is implementing projects through Government institutes like • Conduct focused group discussion with a target group of Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research – EIAR) Regional stakeholders (women and youth groups, farmers Research Institutes (ARARI, TARI, SARI) and Regional Bureau of associations and others as agreed in the December meeting) Agriculture (BOAs). These are the main agencies for research, • Joining the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural research in development and technology extension. In addition, there are celebrating their golden jubilee through a series of seminars, several partner NGOs (CARE, VITA, GOAL) who are also working technology exhibition and other high level ceremonies. with CIP for promoting potato and sweetpotato. SNV, World • Creating a wiki for the coordinating committee Vision and FAO are also working with potato and other roots crops On 11 December 2015 we held a national consultation whose In Ethiopia, there are more than 12 universities which are involved main objectives were to: 1. Improve understanding of the national in Agriculture research activities. The major ones involved in priorities and goals for agricultural and related nutrition and potato and sweet potato research and development are: Alemaya health research for development; 2. Present CGIAR work in University, Awassa University, Mekelle University, Bahridar Ethiopia (major thematic areas, partnerships and geographic University, Sodo University and Ambo University. location); and 3. Identify major opportunities to align activities Next steps: Resource mobilization for strengthening RTB research across actors around specific themes, including reviewing and development activities in the country. Extend collaboration modalities for country collaboration. Participants were drawn with government and non-government agencies for improving mainly from the Federal Government Departments, Development potato and sweetpotato/roots and tubers research and partners (Donors, NGOs) and very few private sector and farmer development as climate smart agricultural system. association groups. The meeting participants agreed that the 58 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country follow on focused meetings by CRPs should aim to include the There were very brief presentation of CRPs in the national wider stakeholders groups including women and youth. consultation meeting. Further discussion around CRPs will take The Roadmap for agricultural and economic growth in Ethiopia is place in upcoming meetings. spelt out in the Government’s vision was launched in during the last quarter of 2015 through the Growth and Transformation Plan II. The CGIAR should continue to align its programs to that. In addition there are already big ongoing programs led by the Government like the Sustainable Land Management (SLM) to which the CGIAR is already a major player. Following the launch of GTP II there have been a lot of national consultation meetings organised by several of CGIAR partners working on the alignment to GTP II. A good example are the meetings organised by the Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA) and the Rural Economic Development and Food Security Sector Working Group (RED&FS) to discuss different pillars under GTP II. A number of CGIAR Centers participated in these consultations based on subject matter. The months of October-December were a busy time in Ethiopia. The CGIAR national consultation focused on strengthening mechanisms of engagement and seeking ways to better align to national priorities. One of the key recommendations was the need to establish a joint CGIAR-national agriculture research system collaboration and communication mechanism. This mechanism, it was recommended, would establish a permanent secretariat for joint planning, sharing of findings, and monitoring and evaluation. The other areas of collaboration were: the development of joint research proposals, sharing of equipment and resources, streamlining policy engagement, and improving opportunities and modalities of capacity development. The need to facilitate access to laboratory facilities was also highlighted as key. These goals could be achieved through enhanced joint research implementation and supervision. This meeting was fully supported by ILRI and the Livestock and Fish CRP. When contacted most Centers had no budgets to 59 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country support this meeting. We risked not holding the meeting if the Lead Center had not taken action. This is a gap that the committee has raised in the previous meetings and asked every Center and CRP to seek further clarification from DDGs, CRP Directors and the CO on the way forward. More details on the Ethiopia national consultations can be found on the GCARD3 website. Next steps: In our last meeting on the 16th of February we reflected on the December meeting and the follow on focused group meetings by individual CRPs. We further tried to clarify amongst ourselves what we understood site integration to mean? We agreed that so far the CRPs’ priorities were well aligned with those of the GTP II and ATA’s priorities. This is very promising for upcoming collaboration. We plan to purposely use the GTP II language in our engagements with the national processes and/or document through a flyer how CGIAR is contributing to GTP II. Furthermore we are aiming to identify what each CRP is seeing as the current situation and then the future situation in terms of site integration in Ethiopia from the perspective of the 10 elements which were highlighted in the guidelines, and to turn all that information into a narrative that also looks at collaboration initiatives and at ideas for future integration based on pipeline plans and projects. We were planning for a day’s meeting for a smaller group to synthesize this material and write the site integration plan. At the time we discussed this we were not sure what is the level of details the CO is expecting for these plans? We also plan to continue the process of refining the mapping of CGIAR work in Ethiopia. Nigeria No information available Attendance of the first national consultation event, organized by IITA and held in Abuja, Nigeria 16th/17th November 2015. At this, represented RTB. This was the first meeting and focused 60 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country predominantly on interactions with national partners including the Ministry of Agriculture. Work between IITA and ILRI on use of cassava peel for livestock feed is an example of interactions between RTB and Livestock CRP. In the future, the most likely avenue of collaboration maybe between RTB and MAIZE and DCL particularly with regard to systems level research. Most likely areas are the forest/savanna transition zone (around Ibadan) where yam and cassava based systems can be found alongside maize. There is likely to be considerable scope for the involvement of a range of other actors within Nigeria including policymakers, NARS (eg NRCRI) and Universities. An implementation plan has been developed which will involve detailed discussions with stakeholders including research donors and development agencies. Tanzania The Tanzania CGIAR country collaboration and site integration The site integration in Tanzania is being led by IITA. RTB Regina Kapinga (IITA) process is coordinated by a CG- Tanzania Site integration process represented during the national consultation meeting. group composed of representatives from: The Ministry of One of the most prominent areas for CG interaction in recent Agriculture , Livestock and Fisheries ( 3 persons), Private Sector (1) years have been through the Africa RISING project, although this , 7 CGIAR Centres (CIAT, CIP, ICRAF, IITA, IRRI, Africa Rice, and ILRI does not have a major RTB component. Africa RISING involves ) that are based in Tanzania plus 4 others (Africa Rice, ICRISAT, collaboration between 6 CG centers, AVRDC and national partners. CIMMYT, Bioversity International ) who have no offices in the country, 9 CRP focal points, (Climate Change, Livestock, Maize, The most important outcome of the site integration meeting was Nutrition and Health, PIM, Rice, Roots Tubers & Bananas, WLS&E) for CG centers to learn about what the Tanzania government is and the Genebank platform. From the national stakeholders’ doing and vice versa. Tanzania is launching a major new consultation workshop which was held in December 2015, agricultural development initiative – the Agricultural Sector principles of success and major opportunities for integration Development Programme Phase II – which will cover all of the between and amongst CG centers, CRPs and national partners priority areas of Tanzania’s agricultural development plans. Once were identified to be: mutual trust, shared vision, shared rules of this plan has been completed, the CG centers are requested to engagement, joint planning and clearly defined roles, focus their work only on priorities identified through this. A plan transparency and accountability, flexibility, equal voice in was also proposed to run a workshop that would bring together partnership, comparative advantage and collective responsibility. Tanzania national research centers with the CG centers, in order to share information and bring the respective programs of 61 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country To ensure alignment with the national agricultural priorities, both research closer together. A major new CG initiative, the CG centres and CRPs have to understand the national strategies as Technologies for African Agricultural Transformation (TAAT), will elaborated in the Tanzanian Agricultural Sector Development involve Tanzania as a focus country. This will bring together 13 CG Program (ASDP) Phase II. This implies that both CG centres and/ centers in addressing a diverse set of R4D targets. Work on all of CRPs, when preparing the proposals that include Tanzania, should the RTB crops will be incorporated into this initiative. Site ensure to access the ASDPII documents for references so that integration work will have a major influence on this, since local where possible align the activities with the identified national partners will drive the prioritization process. priorities. IITA therefore as a lead focal centre, in January this There are currently no specific geographical sites that have been year, was invited to participate in a 5-days national ASDPII identified for CRP collaboration through the site integration prioritization workshop whereby we worked closely with the process. This will happen at a later stage. Ministry officials and other key stakeholders to identify key areas of focus by the country. The documents from this exercise, have Most of the discussion at the site integration meeting focused on been shared with all the CG site-integration focal persons to share the link between the government of Tanzania and CG centres. with their respective directors and teams for consideration when Further partnerships will be identified once more practical developing the draft proposals. It is expected that before final planning begins. submissions, some of the NARS reps. will get an opportunity to The site integration process in Tanzania is being led by Regina provide input on the proposals which include Tanzania to ensure Kapinga, and James Legg represented RTB during all meetings and alignment. will provide feedback to RTB on how the process is progressing. We are also currently striving to jointly develop and implement CG centers have previously worked well together in Tanzania. projects that have multiple commodities and disciplines. An example we plan to emulate is that of AFRICA RISING project which although is led by IITA, it has other implementing centres which include-ICRAF, CIAT, ICRISAT, IITA, ILRI, AVRDC, and CIMMYT respectively. These together with various national R4D partners in the country, are demonstrating a good example of collaboration and integration. AFRICA RISING project, is using a common set of research sites and staff from various centres are participating in the implementation the project. In the pipeline is the new CGIAR-FARA-African Development Bank’s Africa-wide initiative on FEEDING AFRICA. This potential project known as Technologies for African Agricultural Transformation (TAAT), will implement the scaling up and out of the proven technologies from the CG-centres to about 20 African countries. Tanzania, is one of the focus countries for TAAT project which again will provide an opportunity for about 13 CG centres to work together and also 62 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country partner with the governments and other agencies from the selected focus countries. On 11- 15 April, IITA in collaboration with AfDB, will convene in Nigeria, a TAAT awareness regional consultative workshop which will be attended by several CGIAR centres, development partners, sub-regional organizations and several national stakeholders from various countries. Regarding the sharing of the CGIAR facilities, IITA –Tanzania office, already is hosting three CG centres–CIP, IRRI, and ILRI. AGRA although not a CG centre is hosted by IITA. ICRAF and Africa Rice centres are located in the neighbouring areas which also makes it easy for consultation and effective use of the CG facilities. Our site-integration process group will regularly communicate via emails and where possible organize meetings at least once every six months. Co-funding of these meetings will be explored and explored. Plans are also under way, to discuss the possibility of organizing a CG- NARS national awareness workshop aimed at popularizing to the new government, our best-bet technologies for scaling-up and out using the internally-sourced resources. Therefore, the workshop will strategically target the policy & decision makers, private sector and other key players for resource mobilization. The selected technologies for popularization should have been tested and proven for potential to reach and impact millions of beneficiaries in Tanzania. Vietnam Nine CRPS and 10 Centers have participated in the Vietnam For the first meeting, there were 8 non-CG stakeholders Dindo Campilan, CIAT planning for CGIAR country coordination. A national stakeholders’ associated with RTB representing NARI, NGO’s and private sector. consultation workshop was organized in December 2015, with CRP-RTB was presented by Bioversity, CIP and CIAT scientists. over 70 participants representing: 1) research institutes and The CG community in Vietnam is already regularly interacting and government agencies, 2) universities, 3) NGOs-private sector coordinating. agencies and associations, 4) international organizations and donors, and 5) CGIAR staff. • Interactions between CRP-RTB and CCAFS to shares experiences on cassava crop management in Climate Smart Stakeholders agreed on an eco-regional framework to facilitate in- Villages (CSV’s). country collaboration and site integration. The target regions are: 1) Northwest, 2) Northeast, 3) Red river delta, 4) North central • Interactions between CRP-RTB and L&F on the use of coast, 5) Central highlands-south central coast and southeast, and sweetpotato and cassava as animal feed. 63 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country 6) Mekong river delta. In addition, integrating CRPs with national • Interactions between CRP-RTB and HT on system’s research. and local development plans was considered a key dimension of • Interactions between CIAT and CIP scientists concerning country collaboration. For each region, the stakeholders methods for impact assessment. identified: 1) development priorities as set by government policymakers/decision-makers, 2) key research gaps which are • Planning and collaboration between CIP and CIAT in the recommended for the CGIAR to address, and 3) potential partners FoodStart+ project (IFAD / EU funded), involving sweetpotato for specific research and development initiatives. and cassava. Between December 2015 and March 2016, CRPs/Centers also • Regular science seminars between all Vietnam-based CG engaged in bilateral discussions on specific collaboration needs centers during so-called “brown bag seminars”. and opportunities. Several CRPs also organized their respective • Shared office facilities between CG and CRP’s in basically two country/regional planning and consultation events. hubs (recently ILRI moved to the UN building). A follow-up meeting by the CGIAR Vietnam team was held on 7 Beyond key coordination and communication mechanisms that March, with 8 CRPs and 7 Centers represented. The 8 participating were identified during the last internal CGIAR team meeting, CRPs re-confirmed that Vietnam is a target country for CRP2 several project / possible CRP2 activities between CRPs were proposals. As next step, it was also agreed that subnational identified: targeting will be undertaken for higher-resolution site integration plans, i.e. within each agro-ecoregion. A draft agenda for the 10- • RTB-CCAFS: (i) testing of RTB technologies (erosion control, element site integration report was prepared. The proposed varieties, etc.) in CSV’s, (ii) climate suitability models and action items are to be shared with CRPs, for them to indicate their forecasting for RTB crops; suggested priorities as well as intent for co-financing/cost-sharing. • RTB-A4HN: (i) food systems research and role of RTBs for The country collaboration/site integration efforts in Vietnam is income generation / human nutrition; coordinated through: 1) core team with representatives from • RTB-Livestock: (i) use of cassava waste and sweet potato for CRPs/Centers having physical (office) presence in Vietnam, and 2) animal feeding; working group with representatives from all CRPs/Centers • RTB-PIM: (i) inclusive value chain of RTB crops; planning to undertake activities in Vietnam for CRP2. CIAT provides overall leadership, with ICRAF as co-lead Center. In each The main production zones of RTB crops themselves do generally eco-region, a lead Center and supporting CRP/s have also been not overlap within Vietnam. Yet, some geographical sites where identified and agreed upon. cassava research and CRPs overlap have been identified (see below). Opportunities for potato, sweet potato and banana R&D needs to be further identified. The sites where RTB clearly overlaps with other CRPs are: • RTB-CCAFS: Yen Bai province (north-east region of Vietnam). Here CIAT/RTB has a history of cassava work (including cassava management, varietal testing) while CCAFS have established a 64 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country CSV (Ma Village). Also possible benchmark site for the new “livelihoods at scale” FP of RTB. • RTB-Livestock: Dak Lak province (central highlands region of Vietnam). Here CIAT/RTB (with ACIAR funding) is working on cassava value chain research while the Livestock-CRP is working on pig husbandry. There is an opportunity to link. Also possible benchmark site for the new “livelihoods at scale” FP of RTB. Numerous options for such kind of collaborations exists, including: • Learning from different private sector or public private partnerships (PPPs) models in Vietnam, i.e. through CIP (new SFSA collaboration) and CIAT (ACIAR project, VICASS collaboration). • Collaborative R&D with CIRAD who have an active program in the country, comprising food systems, value chain, soil health and other areas of research. • Most CG centers involved in RTB already collaborate with agricultural and other universities in Vietnam, but crosscutting research could be more effectively coordinated at the CRP level. • There are numerous value chain focused NGO’s or service companies in Vietnam, including VECO, SNV, IDH and Fresh Studio. Some of the organizations are working on RTBs. Next steps: • Create opportunities to gain efficiencies for research support on data management, knowledge management and/or M&E. For example, there is an opportunity to streamline M&E and build a deeper and shared protocol with country / ecoregion specific impact pathways and indicators as basis for planning and reporting. Ideally we would develop a joint M&E plan and explore the possibility for CRPs to establish a shared Vietnam M&E facility/team 65 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country • Identify the common inter-CG center research topics / activities which are relevant and in demand for all RTB crops in Vietnam, i.e. seed systems research, capacity building in breeding of clonally propagated crops, among others. Representatives of Bioversity, CIP and CIAT have participated in the two meetings indicated Each CRP focal point in Vietnam has made a presentation of the CRP2 content, FPs and likely relevant areas for implementation. The content was consulted with CRP / CG center management. The main contributions from CRP representatives and national stakeholders is reflected in the integration plan. We are foreseeing the establishment of an RTB in-country hub hosted by CIAT Hanoi office. RTB researchers from CIAT and CIP are already co-located in the same office, while discussions are under way for a Bioversity banana scientist to be posted in the same office. + countries Cameroon No meeting for site integration has been yet held in Cameroon. Nothing to report yet. However I had the opportunity to attend the DRC site integration Placeholder until meeting organized in DRC. In DRC I discussed extensively with meting to be held Manning-Thomas, Nadia (CGIAR Consortium) who was facilitating March 16th this meeting in DRC. In consultation with other CGIAR Centres (IITA, CIFOR, Bioversity) we decided to organize the Cameroon meeting on 16 March 2016. The following institutions are expected to attend this meeting: IITA, CIFOR, Bioversity, ICRAF, IRAD, AVRDC, MINFOF, MINEF, Universities of Yaounde1, IBAYSUP, CRESA. Prior to this meeting, the CGIAR centers based in Cameroon were already working together in projects such as Sentinel Landscapes. ICRAF, CIFOR and Bioversity developed joint teams and worked together on institutional mapping of a landscape, socio-economic characterization and land degradation surveillance. For ICRAF as more most of research activities are covered by FTA, Scientists focussed their activities that are linked to CRP6.1, 66 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country CRP6.2, CRP6.3, CRP6.4, and CRP6.5. Data collected from this research work were analysed and used for publications of scientific papers. With IITA, ICRAF and IRAD had also worked together for the implementation of Humid Tropics program. Overall, to date, the CRPS’ joint initiative in Cameroon has created an approach involving several CGIAR centres (ICRAF, CIFOR, Bioversity), as well as other national partners (like IRAD- Cameroon’s Institute of Agriculture for Development) to design partnership and identity research areas and priorities necessary for the development of the rural sector in Cameroon and other countries in the Congo Basin. When we meet on 16 March, we will identify research priorities and development a common program to address these. DR Congo National consultation workshop for the integration of CGIAR RTB participated at the CRPs national consultation held in Kinshasa Nzola M. Mahungu centers took place in Kinshasa (Democratic Republic of Congo- on Feb. 19th, 2016. (IITA) DRC), February 19th, 2016. Nine CG centers (AfricaRice, CIAT, During CRP I, RTB activities has some joint activities with maize CIFOR, CIMMYT, CIP, ICRAF, IFPRI, IITA and ILRI,) operating directly CRP (CIMMYT), Humidtropics (IITA) and CRP4 (AN4H) or indirectly through partners participated at this workshop. The event brought together more than 60 public-private partners Apart from the on-going cassava breeding (RTB) and biofortified from DRC including the DRC civil society. CRP representatives, cassava (AN4H), and cassava (RTB) and agricultural intensification NARS, donors and government officials. (Humidtropics), there might be some coming with an Aflasafe project yet to be approved (AN4H), and a bilateral project on It was indicated at the workshop that the second phase of CRP’s cassava value chain in eastern DRC also yet to be approved. (2017-2025) presents three innovations as compared to the first one: well-integrated portfolio, aligned with national priorities, and Specific geographical sites identified where the CRP overlaps with coordinated and transparent interaction with local stakeholders others, to be explored Not identified per se, but exists in various and partners. Thus, the national consultation workshop AEZ of DRC (forest, savannah, RTB, grain legumes, maize constituted the first step of the integration process and aimed to intercropping, etc. engage partnership, find synergies and learn about national Other collaborations with universities on capacity building, with priorities. INERA on RTB germplasm development and ensuing value chains, During the event, participants debated DRC development with advances ARIs on molecular tools, etc. challenges and priorities via panel and group discussions.. Next steps: Mapping CRPs activities and the national priorities, Participants referred to examples of successful collaborations in joint upscale of results for greater impact, etc. DRC and strongly recommended a creation of a national R4D 67 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country platform by IITA on behalf oc CG centers in consultation with the Since the national consultation workshop, communication Institut National d’Etude et Recherche Agronomiques (INERA) as amongst CRPs representatives from the nine CG centers working government representative, Federation of farmers Cooperative as in DRC is very active as we are trying to map activities, we hope to civil society representative and the chair of donors community. extend this flagship and CRP II leaders as we move to phase II. So Other themes identified by participants were to have forge a far the communication is only with IITA DDG in charge of R4D. Common vision; to clearly define AR4D priorities; to aim at Impact at scale; and a strategy on Capacity development. Next step: the R4D platform coordinated by IITA will have its first meeting on 11 March 2012, to discuss amongst other issues,: I. The role of the platform in DRC R4D agenda, its evolvement to a steering committee II. The mapping of CRPs present in DRC and refining/aligning CRP II to national priorities III. Explore possibilities of complementarities in sharing IITA and INERA infrastructures wherever feasible. Ghana Although not initially depicted as ‘integration’, CGIAR centres that RTB participation during planning and at the national consultation Olufunke Cofie (IWMI) are active in Ghana have been collaborating for a long time by hosted by IWMI and held in Accra on 2-3 March. All of them are sharing resources and working on different projects together. NARS partners working with CSIR-CRI or on secondment to IITA. Since January 2016, nine Centres (AfricaRice, Bioversity, CIAT, CIP, They “represent” Bioversity in the case of banana plantain and IFPRI, IITA, ILRI, IWMI and WorldFish) and eight CRPs (A4NH, IITA in the cases of yam and cassava. All RTB activities, except CCAFS, DCLAS, Maize, Rice, WLE, RTB, PIM) have been involved in cassava, were mapped along with other CRP activities the Ghana Site integration process. First, the Steering Committee There has probably not much explicit site integration activity. (SC) was constituted by official nominations from the Some of the Jumpstarting project sites are at the Dryland System Centres/CRPS. Several virtual and face-to-face meetings were held benchmark sites. We seem to be the only ones there. Additionally, prior to the national consultation workshop which took place CRP RTB (CIP) has offices in the research institutes, CSIR-CRI and from 2-3 March 2016 in Accra. Other preliminary activities carried SARI where these crops are mandated with the national program. out by the SC were: (i) mapping of Centre/CRP project locations, Our NIRS analytical lab is used occasionally and somewhat thematic focus, target commodities and partnerships in Ghana; (ii) informally to analyze samples of most of the RTB commodities. Review of relevant national policy documents as well as donors’ In addition to IWMI, Africa Rice, Bioversity, IFPRI, and IITA were priorities for Ghana; and (iii) engagement with and sensitization of the centers most engaged with the exercise. IITA had a number of local partners on the Site Integration Process. From the mapping CRPs represented. We agreed that we should be thinking about and review exercise, the SC identified potential thematic areas for new W3 and bilateral opportunities. Pointed out on several CGIAR collaboration in Ghana. occasions the importance of RTB in the national diet = #1. 68 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country Two key national partners of the CGIAR in Ghana are the Ministry However, we recognized that most of current CRP engagement is of Food and Agriculture (MoFA) and the Council for Scientific and in the north of the country where donors are putting most of their Industrial Research (CSIR). These two institutions co-organized the money, but where cassava and bananas tend to be less important. National Consultation workshop with the Centres/CRPs. Over 60 There was general agreement, that one of the most promising people from different stakeholder categories participated in the opportunities for CG centers would be the new ADB program and event. The workshop revealed how the integrated efforts of the that we should position ourselves very deliberately for that. We CGIAR Centres can actually complement national priorities and also agreed to look for other opportunities as they arise. those of other partners, towards agricultural transformation in Key NGOs, universities and donors (SNV, Canada, Netherlands, Ghana. Following MoFA’s presentation on the national priorities USAID, UDS, KNUST) were present at the meeting. In our case, for driving Ghana’s Shared Growth and Development Objectives, MoFA was the lead participant in the discussions, with CSIR the participants identified and discussed key themes that could be somewhat subordinate, mostly due to conflicting schedules. MoFA the CGIAR strategic focus in Ghana. The themes identified were was a good lead, however, since they are the first point of call for consistent with the preliminary findings from the review done by donors interested in agriculture. The enthusiastic participation of the SC. The workshop participants also suggested ways of working MoFA was good, as it reflected general happiness with the CGIAR effectively together (internal integration) and with local partners partnership. (external integration). The workshop further provided insight on tracking the progress and impact of the integrations as well as the Next steps: The report will be out shortly. A number of follow up coordination mechanism to sustain the Site Integration Process. steps were planned. Next steps are: (i) finalise the site integration plan with the Communication with most relevant personnel (DDG-R, Thiele, SO1 information gathered during the workshop; (ii) engage in regular leader, IITA and Bioversity reps on RTB). consultation and exchange with the national partners through their representation in the steering committee and (iii) sharing information at national platforms. The SC agreed that sharing of information, as well as collaboration in joint activities and resource mobilisation is paramount to strengthen our integration. Collaboration will commence on the identified themes and with a joint visit to the National Development Planning Commission of Ghana. India India Country Consultation – Tuesday 22nd March 2016 CIP representatives participating in the CRPs integration meeting ICRISAT on 22 March 2015. CIP’s activities sites are included into the CGIAR integration sites. The representative will be sitting in for RTB and also in CRP- Drylnad Cereals & Legumes (DCL) in small group discussion 69 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country Kenya No information available The national workshop has been held on March 10th-11th and RTB has been represented. All CRP’s have been asked to provide 1 slide in for a CRP presentation. Pre-existing joint or coordinated work: • With ILRI on dual purpose sweetpotato for food and fodder • National research and development stake • USAID Accelerated Value Chain Development project with ILRI – Dairy, Livestock (semi-arid regions); ICRISAT –dryland cereals and legumes – CIP sweetpotato - potato Future collaboration: Hasn’t been explored systematically yet, but potentially Livestock, Maize, CCAFS, WLE, A4HN Specific geographical sites: An activity map will be prepared Each center has a set of long-term public and private sector partners from research, business and development. However, at the national workshop there has been very little turn-out from business (1) and development (1) partners as well as from donors (only Australia). Next steps: • Make sure that meetings are not overrepresented by CGIAR staff (70%) • Better target potential partners with a concrete action plan • To implement effective collaboration coordination has to go beyond large workshops only attended by the well-known partners. Activities like trade fairs and proactive communication directly to stakeholders and potential scaling partners. So far very little, but further coordination will follow in the process of developing the site integration plan which will be submitted by the end of April. All RTB flagships have activities in Kenya and will be mapped into the site integration plan and furthermore we will identify potential collaborative actions. The process of 70 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country coordination has generally been delayed by the CRP proposal writing process with all CGIAR centers. Malawi No information available No information available Mozambique National consultation meetings 22nd/23rd March We had our small meeting with CGIARs. We set up a date for the National consultation for the 22nd and 23rd of March. We hired a local consultant to assist with the preparation. The other consultant the fees/honorarium is still under negotiation. We are now working on all logistics. The information on CRP will be ready before the end of this month. Nepal The process of site integration in Nepal was initiated on No RTB participation in the national consultation. . Arun Joshi (CIMMYT) November 9, 2015 by organizing a meeting of all CG centres No pre-existing joint or coordinated work yet existing. CIP is doing Sugden Fraser (IWMI) working in Nepal. The site integration steering committee was for potato and I have written to Bioversity, Nepal to know if they formed (with one member from each CG/CRP centre). This have any activity related to RTB). IWMI office is also there. There included CIMMYT, IWMI, Biodiversity Int, IFPRI, IRRI, CIFOR and is no integration among the CG centers for RTB in Nepal but needs ICARDA. CCAFS was included in the subsequent meeting. Two to be explored for new RTB activities/projects. meetings were held on 4th and 30th December to share information on work being done by each centre in Nepal and to CIP has one bilateral project on potato information will be plan for a stakeholder consultation meeting which was organized gathered through consultation meeting with partners at Kathmandu on 11 January 2016. Specific geographical sites identified where the CRP overlaps with The purpose of the stakeholder meeting was three-pronged: to others, to be explored yet. design the integrated research agenda, to consolidate CGIAR CIP has two non-CGIAR partners (LIBIRD-NGO and National Potato centres, and to coordinate with national actors and strengthen Research Program under National Agriculture Research Council). the coordination, collaboration and alignments with partners in Next steps: Develop and circulate a template to stakeholders to line with national priorities and policies. More than 60 gather information what they need and how poor participants, representing 34 national institutions participated. farmers/consumers can be benefitted The cost of this meeting was shared by all centres. RTB will be in the site integration meeting being organized by A joint presentation on activities being undertaken by all CG ICRISAT in Delhi on 22 March 2016. centres on various CRPs in Nepal was presented and two discussion sessions were held. The first one focused on better Suggest organization of a one day site integration meeting of CG alignment of current CGIAR research activities, whilst the second centers working in Nepal in Kathmandu or Pokhra such as one on targeting stakeholders’ needs. Opportunities for further Bioversity, IWMMI, CIP and stakeholders (NARC- Nepal Agriculture alignment of CG programs and CRP integration were identified Research Council, LIBIRD etc) to review collation of current CGIAR through shared goals, activities and increased partnerships. The research in Nepal, determine process for engaging stakeholders in 71 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country minutes were prepared along with one pager blog and submitted Nepal, develop a template to gather information and to discuss to CGIAR. The next CG-national consultation meeting was plans for assessing impact. proposed to be held in Nepal in January 2017. Consultation with representatives of partners and beneficiary Highlights included how to better align CG work with national groups where they aim to deliver outcomes at scale, including policy issues, demand for continued capacity building of local governments, NGOs, farmer organizations, processors and others agricultural scientists, the development of stronger national along the value chain, and, ultimately, consumers. The databases, promoting local genetic resources and the need for coordinated commitments in different ecologies can be research on both climatic and non-climatic stress on agriculture. summarized in site integration plan to enable transparent Ideas for new research avenues were also raised. For more info, interaction with local stakeholders. see https://library.cgiar.org/handle/10947/4148 The next steering committee meeting has been scheduled for 10th March to draft the site integration. This is being done based on the national consultation and experiences of each of the centers in Nepal. In doing all this, the central point will be the Agriculture Development Strategy (ADS 2015-2035) approved by Government of Nepal on 14th August, 2015. Rwanda The Rwanda CGIAR country collaboration and site integration RTB will participate not as a CRP but as centers that work on RTB Kirimi Sindi (CIP) process is coordinated by a committee of six individuals crops. That is CIP and IITA representing 4 centres. The Rwanda based CGIAR Centres are CIP, Under Humid and Tropics CRP a R4D site was identified where all CIAT, IITA, and ICRAF. Each centre has one or two individuals as the centers are working together. part of the steering committee. The centres have held 4 site integration meetings so far. One was with three main donors Currently there are no W1 and W2 funds I know of that are represented in Rwanda (USAID, EU, and DFID). The committee is utilized here by any center. However, in the past RTB partly working on mapping all on-going projects in Rwanda by the funded PRA work that is coordinated by IITA, CIP and Bioversity, different centres and CRPS. This will be put on a map of Rwanda We are mapping where all the projects under CRPs and Centers to assist all the centres understand areas where they is there is are working. Since this country is very small, CIP and IITA are potential for synergy in working together. The map will assist the working in common districts and there are opportunities to have CG centres in communicating the contribution they are having to common sites on the ground. However, the mapping is still on- the donors and government policy makers and speak as one voice. going on and I cannot specify a particular site yet. The committee under the leadership of CIP will organized a CGIAR In Rwanda all CGIAR centers and CRPs have to work with the site integration workshop in Kigali on 29th March, 2016. This government bodies such as Rwanda Agricultural Board (RAB), workshop will bring together an estimated 75 representative of Local governments in the districts, University of Rwanda. CIP is donors, government agencies, other development organizations, working with University of Rwanda, Mount Kenya University, civil societies, and financial institutions. There has been an already Kepler Institute, Local development organization, international 72 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country established forum R4D by Humid and Tropics that brings together development organization such as World Vision, CRS, One Acre all the CGIAR centres, policy makers, and other implementing Fund. CIP is collaborating with FAO, One UN, and UNICEF. partners in working together in an integrated manner. The site Next steps: This is yet to be addressed but the Centers are integration committee has resolved to build on this already on planning to strengthen the collaboration. At the moment we share going forum and expand it further to achieve the CGIAR site resources like office space, vehicles, and conference or meeting integration goals. rooms. We expect that we shall be utilizing same implementing Next steps: partners when possible to implement our projects on the ground. • We will be setting up a full secretariat to assist in We are being requested by donors to actively lobby the organising the workshop and all the invited participant will get government as one CGIAR body when we want to influence invitation letters by 11th March, 2016. polices. • Next review meeting will be on 18th March, 2016 to So far we have had 5 site coordination meetings 4 for planning review the plans and progress for the workshop preparations and one a joint meeting with donors. IITA and CIP staffs are always represented. We are planning to fund the site integration forum • The main workshop meeting to be held on 29th, March through the centers contributions and CIP and IITA will contribute. 2016. This meeting will gather stakeholders views and then utilizing the recommendation to work on the site integration plan The current site integration committee has two members from all that will be finalized by end of April, 2016. the centers in Rwanda (CIP, CIAT, IITA, and ICRAF (1)). CIP being the lead center chairs all the meetings and is responsible for We will be posting all the minutes to the CG sites in the next two convening meetings and other activities. We have also welcomed weeks. Humid and Tropics site coordinator from Rwanda Agricultural Board to be part of the Forum organizing committee. After the forum we will then plan on the future activities and the role each center will play. Uganda The site integration process in Uganda is jointly chaired by RTB participation in the national consultation through Bioversity, Bioversity and CIP on a 2-year rotational basis, with Bioversity CIP and IITA. Eldad Karamura starting in 2016. A steering committee involving all the 8 CGIAR Initial discussions started with the NARS presenting their national (Bioversity) centres present in Uganda (Bioversity, CIAT, CIP, ICRAF, IFPRI, IITA, R & D priorities while the CG presented theirs in Uganda. In the ILRI, and IWMI), was formed and held its first meeting on January issuing discussions, it emerged that the NARS need to consult 27, 2016. At that meeting the 1st Consultation Stakeholder widely in their constituency while the CG need to develop their meeting was fixed for 9 March 2016. All centres agreed to share vision, mission, and other strategic objectives for Uganda in order the costs of the stakeholder consultation workshop. A second to have meaningful discussions. Steering Committee meeting was held on 11 February 2016, following which the chair and co-chair visited some key NARS Both the NARS and CG entities agreed that this is going to be a stakeholders such NARO-Uganda DG and Makerere University. continuous process of engagement. It is also perceived as multi- CIAT member consulted with the Uganda National Farmers’ layered with different partners along the value chains in the food 73 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country Federation, while the IWMI member consulted with teams in the agri-business; must include policy and environment advocacy Ministry of Finance. These consultation helped to collect partnerships secondary data and afforded us opportunities to interact with key RTB and Humidtropics strong collaboration. A key number of stakeholders. The steering committee resolved that the first research outputs and processes jointly produced. There are many stakeholder workshop be co-hosted with the National Agricultural examples of successful inter centre/CRP collaboration such as Research Organization (NARO) of Uganda in order to enhance HarvestPlus, CIALCA, Banana Xanthomonas Wilt, etc from which ownership by national partners. The third Steering Committee lessons can be drawn to build truly CRP programs. Joint meeting was held on February 29, 2016 and focused on the plans publications will require agreements on authorship and copy right for the implementation of the Stakeholder Consultation issues. The engagement could be extended to our NARS partners. workshop; drew up the program, agreed on the discussion issues and the details of workshop outputs. Geographical sites: Central Uganda (Mukono, Luwero and Kiboga districts); RTB overlaps with HT. Other staff members from the CRP working in Uganda are email- looped into all communications regarding the CGIAR site The Site Integration meeting identified NARO-Uganda, Makerere integration process right from the start. We hold internal brief University, Uganda Christian University, World Vision. A credible consultations to discuss issues on the structure and content of on set of good examples of shared research sites is documented and meeting agendas and usually arrive at a common consensus. available Minutes from these meetings are shared to all members of the This is already happening informally but can be formalized. The steering committee through whom information is shared with definition of 'site' will need to be agreed; is it based on the respective centre teams. In addition we are collecting information political boundaries or on agroecologies (hence cutting across from partners and stakeholders and we hope to build this borders)? A number of Centers are already sharing research sites information into sharable data about our site. Materials collected under Humid Tropics and RTB-banana; ICRAF has common sites so far include: with ILRI on dairy in central and eastern Uganda; and with CIFOR • CGIAR major partners/collaborators in Uganda. and CAIT under sentinel landscapes. It makes a lot of sense to converge both at field research and policy engagement levels in • documents that highlight national development priorities in order to strengthen interdisciplinary/sectoral approaches on the Uganda. one hand and policy engagement on the other • CGIAR research work in Uganda. 6. Next steps: • Individual project activities • There is a framework in place to facilitate effective site The CGIAR site integration committee has so far not reached a integration but there is no specific financial support to make it stage of discussing potential bilateral project or W1/2-funded happen. activities planned in Uganda for joint activities amongst CRPs. • There is a need to develop CG country-specific strategic However, in our discussions, we noted that for several CRPs objectives, subtended by RBM tools and approaches to operational in Uganda, there are already several clusters of provide rallying focus for the CRPs in the country. centres collaborating in one or more of the CRPs and sharing sites 74 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country among themselves and with NARS. The Humidtropics Uganda • Cross-cutting activities such as gender and other systems work action sites of Mukono-Wakiso and Kiboga-Kyankwanzi field sites should be internally coordinated and information collected seem to be common sites in which many CGIAR centres are and shared to cut costs. currently working including ILRI, CIP, IITA, Bioversity, ICRAF and • Although many CRPs and W3 projects are already sharing CIAT. Furthermore, it was noted that centres were already sharing facilities and sites (with NARS), there is room for laboratory facilities along with NARO-Uganda institutes. improvement. Some arrangements should be reached with The workshop on March 9, 2016 will lay the foundation for a long partner NARS so that similar tools are used to collect data and term engagement between the CRPs and Ugandan partners and data sharing made possible. stakeholders. Our intention at this stage is not to come up with a • Sharing CRP and center program plans for Uganda, to identify complete work plan/site integration plan during the actual opportunities for alignment, co-location and sequencing meeting but to really listen to and discuss with partners and linked to acceleration of data sharing both between CG and stakeholders about the development priorities for Uganda; what with national partner - customizing Open Access to Uganda. the various stakeholders and partners are doing themselves to meet those priorities and goals; and exploring what the • Current research seminars, policy dialogues and other CGIAR opportunities are for partnership, alignment and working wide engagement need to be strengthened to produce together towards these goals. The outputs of the meeting will knowledge/policy briefs. guide the development of our site integration plans while • Communicating outcomes of these engagements need to informing the CRP II process. make their way to projects/programs (bilateral and CRP) and even to SRF when updated. RTB represented in the Site Integration process: • All RTB centers are fully represented at the Site Integration Committee. • They have all participated in 4 steering Committee meetings so far. • CIAT, IITA and Bioversity were already working together in the framework of CIALCA Coordination internally: • There is Group email where at least two people from the 8 centers subscribe; • Every center representative is expected to be the link pin to the mother center for information flow about our discussions to provide feedback. 75 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country Zambia The first step towards site integration was the establishment of a Participation in the consultation since the beginning. Peter Setimela steering committee composed of representatives from CIMMYT, Experience under the USAID-Feed the Future Programme project (CIMMYT) ILRI, WorldFish, HarvestPlus, CIAT, IITA, Bioversity, ICRAF, ICRISAT where IITA was leading the Consortium. We had ICRISAT and CIP. The steering committee developed the agenda for the (groundnuts +aflatoxin), CIP (Orange sweet potato), CIMMITY site integration consultation workshop which was held from the 9- (maize, Simileza (Maize and Soya Bean/Cowpea farming system), 10 February 2016 in Lusaka. The workshop brought together Harvest Plus (Bio-fortification), IITA (cassava, Similesa, and stakeholders from the CGIAR Research Programs (CRPs), Ministry aflatoxin). This project was implemented over 4 years in Eastern of Agriculture and Livestock, research agencies, academic Province of the country. We had opportunity to work together. institutions, donors, NGOs and the private sector. The consultative meeting came against the background of the launch The meeting did not arrive at that point of identifying activities. of the Second Phase of the CRPs, focusing on integrated research These deliberations allowed the representatives to appreciate the agendas to more effectively contribute to the objectives and whole concept of site integration and the new thinking of CGIAR targets set by the Strategic and Results Framework of CGIAR and under the Second Phase of the CRPs. also to align the CRPs research agenda with national agricultural The critical next steps were agreed on and it concludes the priorities in Zambia. following among others From the workshop, the participants identified key elements that • Incorporation of the workshop inputs and agreed actions into would lead to successful site integration, the key elements are the CRP proposal summarised under the headings of: core values, administration • Implementation of the ideas identified and discussed during and management, technical, communication and resource the workshop mobilisation in the workshop report. Furthermore participants identified key activities that would be required to bring about site • Feedback on the high level meetings to follow and decisions integration and which areas they would like to proceed in on Zambia Site Integration. partnership with the CGIAR and CRPs. The Zambian National • Developing a plan for site integration and soliciting buy-in Agriculture Investment Plan (NAIP) provided a basis for the No site has been identified yet. discussions and is key in ensuring the alignment of the research and development priorities in the Zambia agricultural sector goals. Collaboration mostly with private sector, such as investors who The key issues identified for site integration included the are called by the government to diversify the agriculture following: It is planned a high level meetings to follow and decisions on a) Resource mobilization to drive the site integration process Zambia Site Integration b) Development of coordination structures to provide strategic There has not been pre-existing mechanisms where the CRP has direction for site integration been involved in to coordinate across centers/CRPs in-country c) Shared vision among CGIAR Centers and national partners 76 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 6 Target country Define steps taken so far (March 2016) Define plan and schedule through which your CRP will provide (++ and + countries to establish national level engagement relevant elements for development of CGIAR site integration in relevant to your CRP) with other CRPs towards site integration this country d) Capacity development of national partners and research infrastructure e) Collaboration mechanisms f) Alignment of CGIAR research activities to national priorities g) Identification of research priorities, effective delivery and scaling-out h) Impactful development initiatives to ensure improved production, food and nutrition security for smallholder farmers in Zambia. i) Coordinated and harmonized communications strategy encompassing learning hubs to share lessons. The workshop also identified critical steps that will lead to the establishment and coordination structures to drive site integration in Zambia. 77 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 ANNEX 7: RTB Staffing of management team and flagship projects 78 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Program Management Unit 79 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Graham THIELE Current position and affiliation: Program Director, CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Profile: • Building a shared vision and mobilizing people and resources • Strategic leadership and facilitation of multi-country research teams with diverse partners • Promoting innovation processes in varietal adoption, value chains and seed systems • Priority setting, adoption studies, impact assessment and evaluation approaches • Participatory research and extension methods • Project proposal development and project management • Commitment to improving the well-being of the poor and gender equity through research Employment: • 2012-2015. Director RTB. International Potato Center (CIP), Peru • 2006-2011. Leader of Impact Enhancement Division. International Potato Center, Peru • 2002-2006. Head of Mission. CIP, Ecuador • 1998-2006. Coordinator Papa Andina Initiative. CIP, Bolivia and Ecuador Education: • Ph.D., 1983, Social Anthropology, Cambridge University, Cambridge, United Kingdom • M.Sc., 1983, Agricultural Economics, Wye College, University of London, London, United Kingdom Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: • Thiele, G. (1999). “Informal potato seed system in the Andes: Why are they important and what should we do with them?” World Development. 51 • Thiele, G., A. Devaux, I. Reinoso, H. Pico, F. Montesdeoca, M. Pumisacho, J. Andrade-Piedra, C. Velasco, P. Flores, R. Esprella, A. Thomann, M. Manrique & D. Horton (2011). “Multi-stakeholder platforms for linking small farmers to value chains: evidence from the Andes.” International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 9(3) • Thiele, G., K. Theisen, M. Bonierbale and T. Walker (2010). “Targeting the Poor and Hungry with Potato Science.” Potato Journal 37(3-4): 75-86 • Fuglie, K. and G. Thiele (2009). Research Priority Assessment at the International Potato Center (CIP). Prioritizing Agricultural Research for Development. D. A. Raitzer and G. W. Norton, CABI: 25-43 • Sarapura-Escobar, Silvia, Hambly-Odame, Helen, and Thiele, Graham. 2015. Gender and Innovation in Peru’s Native Potato Market Chains. Book Chapter. In: Transforming Gender and Food Systems in the Global South. IDRC, Canada (in press). Taylor and Francis Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Leadership role with CIP scientists in securing project funding including BMGF Funded Sweet Potato Project ($m 20), Andean Change Program ($mill. 6.3) and Belgian Cooperation Funded Ahipa Project ($mill. 4.7). Led the Andean Change Program on behalf of CIP and CIAT, with 20+ national partners, in four countries to assess participatory innovation processes, leverage advocacy and influence policy • Head of the CIP Division which coordinates and carries out impact and adoption studies of new agricultural technology, including a global impact study of potato varieties. Implemented center wide protocols for collection of baseline and survey data. Contributed to innovation in potato value chains in the Andes with wide scale uptake of varieties and market access with native varieties. Role: Program Director and lead of new proposal development 80 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Bhawana UPADHYAY Current position and affiliation: Gender Coordinator Scientist, CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Profile: Main expertise area: Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) Employment: • 2011-2015: Program Officer-Gender and Rights, Center for People and Forests (RECOFTC), Thailand • 2006-2010: Program Manager- GESI, Oxfam GB, Nepal • 2002-2005: Associate Expert-Gender, Water and Poverty, IWMI, India Education: • 2004: Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program (Development Research), ZEF, Germany • 2002: Master of Policy Studies (Public Policy), GRIPS, Japan • 2000: Master of Science (Community Development), UPLB, Philippines Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: • Upadhyay, B., 2015, Mainstreaming Gender into Forest Policies in Asia and the Pacific, A Synthesis Report covering Eight Countries (Cambodia, Fiji, Indonesia, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Viet Nam), FAO-RECOFTC: Thailand. • Upadhyay, B., 2015, Understanding Women’s Inclusion in Forestry, Policy Briefs covering Eight Countries (Cambodia, Fiji, Indonesia, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Viet Nam), FAO-RECOFTC: Thailand. • Upadhyay, B., 2012, Farming Women and Irrigation Technology: Cases from Nepal, in M. Zwarteveen, S. Ahmed and S. Gautam (eds), Diverting the Flow, SaciWATERS. • Upadhyay, B., 2006, Poverty and Gendered Livelihood: Making Water Work, in K.L. Datta (ed), Fluid Bonds, Stree Publications and Australian National University (ANU). • Upadhyay, B., 2005, Women and Natural Resource Management: Illustrations from India and Nepal. Natural Resources Forum. Vol. 29, No. 2. • Upadhyay, B., 2005, Gendered Livelihoods and Multiple Water Use in North Gujarat, Agricultural and Human Values Journal, Vol. 22, No. 3. • Upadhyay, B., 2004, Gender Aspects of Smallholder Irrigation Technology: Insights from Nepal, Journal of Applied Irrigation Science, Vol. 39, No. 2. • Upadhyay, B., 2003, Water, Poverty and Gender: Review of Evidences from Nepal, India and South Africa, Water Policy Journal, Vol 5 Issue 5. Role in RTB: Leader, gender portfolio. 81 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Dagmar WITTINE Current position and affiliation: Program Management Officer, RTB Program Management Unit Profile: Project-management/methodological expertise/Organisational development: Diploma in systemic organisational development and leadership skills/management tools; management of the complete lifecycle of projects of/with different international donors: Analysis and development of best-practice- models, lessons learnt and strategic guidelines, Redaction of reports and didactic materials. Agriculture / sustainable natural resource management: Sustainable agriculture, agricultural value chain development, Socio-economics, income generating activities in the field of agriculture, microcredits, etc. Nature conservancy, Participatory Protected Area Management. Employment: • 2006 – 2013, Senior Projects Manager. Agriculture and Food Consultants International GmbH (AFC), Bonn (Germany): Business development for Agriculture, Food security, sustainable/integrated rural development. • 2002-2005, Expert for Planning and evaluation of agricultural projects, German Development Service (DED, since 2011: GIZ), Bolivia. • 2001 – 2002, Scientific assistant, Centre for Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture and Forestry (CeTSAF), University of Goettingen, Germany. Education: • 2001: Magister scientiarum agrariarum (M.sc.sgr.), Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture. University of Goettingen, Germany • 1998: Magister Artium (M.A.), Anthropology & Development Sociology & Political Sciences. University of Bayreuth, Germany Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: N/A Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Project identification and acquisition/Resource mobilization. Backstopping, steering of implementation of projects/programmes. Creation and maintenance of professional networks (Networking). Strategic Planning (Program structure, portfolio, proposal writing/editing, program strategies for different technical areas as gender, communication/media/PR, capacity development, partnerships, etc) General Management Processes (deputize Program director, focal point for external Program audits and evaluations), Manage: internal Monitoring and Evaluation Processes / Results Based Management; finances and contracts, staff supervision/coaching. Ensure good communication Management Unit internal and with all Program participating Centers scientists and administrative units Role in RTB: Program Manager with M&E tasks 82 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Holly HOLMES Current position and affiliation: Communications Specialist, CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas Profile: As the RTB communications specialist, Holly oversees the program’s strategic communication direction, internal communication, event coordination, website, blog writing, social media and media relations, among other activities. During her time at WorldFish, Holly contributed to communication strategies for both the center and the CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Holly also developed and implemented communication outreach strategies for key campaigns and events, including placing stories and opinion pieces in international and regional media outlets. As a Writer, Holly specialized in communicating the center’s key research successes in a variety of mediums to audiences including partners and donors. Employment: 2014 – 2015 – Writer, WorldFish, Malaysia 2012 – 2014 – Communications Assistant, WorldFish, Malaysia 2012 – 2012 – Public Relations Intern, Queensland Museum and Sciencentre, Australia 2011 – 2011 – Campaign Assistant, Amnesty International, Australia Education: 2012: Bachelor of Communication, Public Relations, University of Queensland, Australia 2012: Bachelor of Journalism, University of Queensland, Australia Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: None Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: - Role in RTB: Communications Specialist, CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas 83 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Michael FRIEDMANN Current position: Science Officer, CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) Profile: Extensive research experience in agricultural sciences, horticulture, breeding, genetics, genomics and life sciences. Project manager in multidisciplinary applied plant genomics projects. Team leader-tomato breeding in public research institute. Employment: • 2015-present: Science Officer, RTB Program, CIP-CGIAR, Lima, Peru • 2008-2015: Project & Research Manager, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada • 2006-2007: Manager, Drug Discovery, Forbes Medi-Tech, Vancouver, Canada • 2002-2006: Research Associate, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada • 1995-2002: Scientist, Tomato Breeding & Genetics, Volcani Center ARO, Bet-Dagan, Israel Education: • 1989: PhD Horticulture, Washington State University, USA • 1981: MSc Field & Vegetable Crops, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: McKown AD, Klápště J, Guy RD, Geraldes A, Porth I, Hannemann J, Friedmann M, Muchero W, Tuskan G, Ehlting J, Cronk Q, El-Kassaby Y, Mansfield S, & CJ Douglas (2014) Genome-wide association implicates numerous genes underlying ecological trait variation in natural populations of Populus trichocarpa. New Phytologist 203:535- 553. Porth I, Klápště J, Skyba O, Hannemann J, McKown AD, Guy RD, DiFazio SP, Muchero W, Ranjan P, Tuskan GA, Friedmann MC, Ehlting J, Cronk QCB, El-Kassaby YA, Douglas CJ & SD Mansfield (2013) Genome-wide association mapping for wood characteristics in Populus identifies an array of candidate SNPs. New Phytolologist 200:710- 726. Geraldes A, DiFazio SP, Slavov GT, Ranjan P, Muchero W, Hannemann J, Gunter LE, Wymore AM, et al. (2013) A 34K SNP genotyping array for Populus trichocarpa: Design, application to the study of natural populations and transferability to other Populus species. Molec Ecology Res 13:306-323. Friedmann M, Ralph SG, Aeschliman D, Zhuang J Ritland K, Ellis BE, Bohlmann J & CJ Douglas (2007) Microarray gene expression profiling of the developmental transition from primary to secondary growth and constitutive defense in Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) apical shoots. J Exp Bot 58: 593-614. Lapidot M, Friedmann M, Pilowsky M, Ben-Joseph R, & S Cohen (2001) Effect of host plant resistance to Tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV) on virus acquisition and transmission by its whitefly vector. Phytopathology 91: 1209-1213. Friedmann M, Migone TS, Russell SM, & WJ Leonard (1996). Different interleukin 2 -chain tyrosines couple to at least two signaling pathways and synergistically mediate interleukin 2-induced proliferation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93: 2077-2082. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Project Manager of multi-partner, multidisciplinary Genome Canada funded project using WGS to identify alleles in poplar associated with adaptation and wood chemistry traits. As tomato breeder lead, developed fully resistant geminivirus resistant cultivars, and was recipient of several competitive international grants. Role in RTB: Science Officer for RTB CRP. 84 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Selim Erdil GUVENER Current position and affiliation: Compliance and Intellectual Assets Manager, International Potato Center (CIP) Profile: Lawyer with 12 years (7 years post-qualification) experience. Trained in French, English and Turkish law. Called to the Bar in Turkey and member of the Law Society of England and Wales. Practice focused on International relations; policy; compliance; intellectual property management; natural resources management; technology transfer. Experience in international agricultural research and development with ICRAF, CIP, and AfricaRice. Private sector and natural resources management experience providing legal advice to Iron and Steel, Petroleum, Pharmaceutical and Telecommunications companies in regulatory compliance and intellectual property. Employment: 2013 - present: Compliance and Intellectual Assets Manager, International Potato Center, Peru. 2010 - 2013: Attorney, Guvener Law Offices, U.K. / Turkey. 2006 - 2007: Attorney, Pekin & Bayar Law Firm, Turkey. 2004 - 2005: Trainee Attorney, Cerrahoglu Law Firm, Turkey. Education: 2008: Master of Laws, International and Environmental Law, Cambridge University, U.K. 2006: Master of Arts, International Relations, Institut Européen des Hautes Etudes International, France. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: None Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Experience in the management of public listings and takeover projects of large companies with leadership and collaboration of teams of lawyers, bankers and business managers: - Privatization of Turkish Iron and Steel Company (ERDEMIR) for US$ 2.77 billion; advising a consortium of international bidders on due diligence, asset valuation, risk assessment and regulatory compliance. - Privatization of Turkish State Petroleum Refineries (TUPRAS) for US$ 4.14 billion, representing a German/Austrian consortium of bidders on due diligence, asset valuation, risk assessment and regulatory compliance. - Initial Public Offering of Digiturk Media (largest satellite TV network in Turkey) at LSE and NYSE representing the company with extensive IP and regulatory compliance assessments. - Takeover by competitive bidding of 75% of Eczacibasi Pharma by Zentiva N.V. for € 430 million, representing the buyer in due diligence, risk assessment, company valuation, share purchase agreement and shareholders agreement. Role in RTB. Compliance and Intellectual Assets Manager located within the Project Management Unit for overall coordination of intellectual property management and compliance with donor, national and international regulatory framework. 85 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 FP1: Enhanced genetic resources 86 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Clair HERSHEY Current position and affiliation: Leader, Cassava Program, CIAT Profile: Expertise in research program development and management for crop improvement, including full value chain integration • Led a global cassava breeding team with broad national program partnerships • Led an interdisciplinary global team of scientists to develop, together with partners, cassava technologies that raise farmer incomes, improve food security and nutrition, and protect the environment in cassava- based systems • Provided leadership to RTB planning and program execution • PI for multiple bilateral cassava projects, including cassava doubled haploids (global), cassava processing (global), and cassava seed systems (Haiti) • Developed communication and training tools to support plant breeding capacity development at the global level Employment: • 2011 – present: Leader, Cassava Program, CIAT, Cali, Colombia and RTB Center Focal Point (CIAT) • 2009 – 2010: Visiting Scientist at FAO’s Global Partnership Capacity Building Initiative for Plant Breeding (GIPB) • 1992–Present (active to 2009): Partner, Hershey Brothers Farms (Lancaster County, PA, USA) • 1978-1991: Plant Breeder, Cassava Program, CIAT, Cali, Colombia Education: • 1978: PhD, Major field in Plant Breeding; Minor fields – Entomology; International Agriculture, Cornell University Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: • Ceballos, H., Kawuki, R. S., Gracen, V. E., Yencho, G. C., & Hershey, C. H. (2015). Conventional breeding, marker-assisted selection, genomic selection and inbreeding in clonally propagated crops: a case study for cassava. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 1-21. • Hershey, C.H. and Neate, P. (eds.). (2013). Eco-efficiency: From vision to reality (Issues in Tropical Agriculture series). Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), 252 p. -- (CIAT Publication No. 381). • Ceballos, H., Hershey, C., & Becerra-López-Lavalle, L. A. (2012). New approaches to cassava breeding. Plant Breeding Reviews, Volume 36, 427-504. • Mba, C., Guimaraes, E. P., Guei, G. R., Hershey, C., Paganini, M., Pick, B., & Ghosh, K. (2012). Mainstreaming the continuum approach to the management of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture through national strategy. Plant Genetic Resources, 10(01), 24-37. • Guimaraes, E. P., Debouck, D., Beebe, S. E., Pompilio Martínez, C., Hershey, C. H., & Ceballos, H. (2011). Pre- breeding. An alternative to add value to the plant genetic resources. Sveriges Utsädesförenings Tidskrift [Journal of the Swedish Association], 118(2). Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Leadership in integrating genetic resources and breeding during positions held at CIAT and FAO and multiple consultancies including Global Crop Development Trust and Bioversity International • Full engagement with development and execution of RTB research and capacity development agenda since 2011 Role in RTB: Leader of Flagship 1: Discovery: Enhanced Genetic Resources 87 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Merideth BONIERBALE Position: Senior Breeder and Leader, Genetics, Genomics & Crop Improvement DCE, International Potato Center (CIP) Profile: Plant Breeding, comparative genetic mapping, pre-breeding/ trait transfer, base-broadening breeding with crop wild relatives; valorization of landrace diversity; Biofortification; disease and stress resistance; Committed to team work and improving processes and capacities for individual and team results. Employment: List last four positions held • 1997- present: Senior Breeder &Leader, Genetics, Genomics & Crop Improvement, CIP, Peru • 1992-1996: Cassava Geneticist, CIAT, Colombia, • 1990-1992: Post-doctoral Scientist, Plant Breeding Department, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Education: • 1990: PhD in Plant Breeding, Cornell University, US • 1987: MSc in Plant Breeding and Plant Pathology, Cornell University, US • 1975: B.Sc. in Plant Science, Cornell University, US Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Andre, C.M., Bonierbale, M., Burgos, G., Evers, D., Ziebel, J., Guignard, C., Huasman, J.F., Zum Felde, T. (2015). In vitro bioaccessibility and bioavailability of iron from potatoes with varying vitamin C, carotenoid and phenolic concentrations. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry (JAFC). Vol.63, pp.9012-9021 2) Mihovilovich, E., Sanetomo, R., Hosaka, K., Ordoñez, B., Aponte, M., & Bonierbale, M. (2015). Cytoplasmic diversity in potato breeding: case study from the International Potato Center Molecular Breeding, Vol. 35, p1, 10 p. 3) Lindqvist-Kreuze, H., Gastelo, M., Perez, W., Forbes, G.A., De Koeyer, D., Bonierbale, M. (2014) Phenotypic Stability and Genome-Wide Association Study of Late Blight Resistance in Potato Genotypes Adapted to the Tropical Highlands. Phytopathology. ISSN: 0031-949X. Vol: 104, 624-633 pp. 4) Paget, M., Amoros, W., Salas, E., Eyzaguirre, R., Alspach, P., Apiolaza, L., Noble, A., Bonierbale, M. (2014). Genetic Evaluation of Micronutrient Traits in Diploid Potato from a Base Population of Andean Landrace Cultivars. Crop Science. ISSN: 0011-183X. Vol: 54. Pages: 1949-1959. 5) Sharma, S.K., Bolser, D., de Boer, J., Sønderkær, M., Amoros, W., Carboni, M.F., D'Ambrosio, J.M., de la Cruz, G., Di Genova, A., Douches, D. S., Eguiluz, M., Guo, X., Guzman, F., Hackett, C.A., Hamilton, J. P., Li, G., Li, Y., Lozano, R., , Bonierbale, M., (2013) Construction of Reference Chromosome- Scale Pseudomolecules for Potato: Integrating the Potato Genome with Genetic and Physical Maps. G3- Genes Genomes Genetics. ISSN: 2160-1836. Vol:3. Pag: 2031-2047. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Project and program management in range of $ 0.5 - 7Mio- strategic direction, monitoring and evaluation, fund-raising, reporting; Crop Leader for potato (HarvestPlus) realizing first significant genetic gains for micronutrient content with small team over 10 years. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader DI1.1: Breeding Communities of Practice of Flagship Project FP1: Discovery Enhanced genetic resources; and Support Leader for Cluster PO2.5: Potato varieties for Asia of Flagship Project FP2: Productive varieties and quality seed. 88 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Luis Augusto BECERRA LOPEZ-LAVALLE Current position and affiliation: Principal Research Scientist – Group Leader – Genetics and Genomics - International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) – Cassava program. Profile: Breeder Principal Research Scientist – Group Leader – Genetics and Genomics - International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) – Cassava program. This recent promotion will also involve leading the cassava digital genebank and implementing the NextGeneration breeding agenda of the new CRP on RTBs. Luis Augusto is an experienced principal agricultural research leader with a demonstrated ability to strategize, mobilize resources, and manage professional research teams for crop improvement. He is well respected in the agricultural research for development (R4D) community for his expertise in designing innovative and impactful solutions through frontier genetics and biotechnology tools. Luis Augusto serves as a Principal Research Scientist at the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), in charge of leading the Cassava Program’s Plant Molecular and Quantitative Genetics Laboratory. In this role, he assembled and managed a professional research team of up to 30 researchers. Employment: • 2015-present: Principal Research Scientist – Group Leader – Genetics and Genomics - International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) – Cassava program. • 2012-2014: RTB Global Theme Leader – Accelerating the development and selection of varieties with higher, more stable yield and added value (Theme 2) - CGIAR Research Program on Root, Tubers and Bananas. • 2009-2015 Senior Research Scientist – Group Leader – Genetics and Genomics - International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) – Cassava program. • 2004-09/2009: Research Scientist/Engineer – Team Leader-Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) – Division of Plant Industry. Education • 2000: PhD in Plant Molecular Genetics, School of Biological Sciences, The University of Sydney (USYD) • 1995: MSc in Plant Cytogenetics, Cayetano Heredia University, Lima-Peru. Publications 1) SOTO, J. C., ORTIZ, J. F., PERLAZA-JIMÉNEZ, L., VÁSQUEZ, A. X., BECERRA LOPEZ-LAVALLE, L. A., MATHEW, B., LÉON, J., BERNAL, A. J., BALLVORA, A. & LÓPEZ, C. E. 2015. A genetic map of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) with integrated physical mapping of immunity-related genes. BMC Genomics, 16, 190. 2) AGRE, A. P., DANSI, A., RABBI, I. Y., BATTACHARGEE, R., DANSI, M., GEDIL, M., BECERRA LOPEZ-LAVALLE, L. A., SANNI, A., AKOUEGNINOU, A. & AKPAGANA, K. 2015. Agromorphological Characterization of Elite Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) Cultivars Collected in Benin. International Journal of Current Research in Biosciences and Plant Biology, 2, 1-14. 3) FERGUSON, M., KOGA, T. M., JOHNSON, D. A., KOGA, K. A., HIRSCH, G. N., BECERRA LOPEZ-LAVALLE, L. A. & MESSIER, W. 2015. Identification of genes that have undergone adaptive evolution in cassava (Manihot esculenta) and that may confer resistance to cassava brown streak disease. Journal of African Biotechnology, 14, 96-107. 4) PEÑA-VENEGAS, C., STOMPH, T., VERSCHOOR, G., BECERRA LOPEZ-LAVALLE, L. A. & STRUIK, P. 2014. Differences in Manioc Diversity among Five Ethnic Groups of the Colombian Amazon. Diversity, 6, 792-826. 5) WANG, W., FENG, B., XIAO, J., XIA, Z., ZHOU, X., LI, P., ZHANG, W., WANG, Y., MØLLER, B. L., ZHANG, P., LUO, M.-C., XIAO, G., LIU, J., YANG, J., CHEN, S., RABINOWICZ, P. D., CHEN, X., ZHANG, H.-B., CEBALLOS, H., LOU, Q., ZOU, M., CARVALHO, L. J. C. B., ZENG, C., XIA, J., SUN, S., FU, Y., WANG, H., LU, C., RUAN, M., ZHOU, S., WU, Z., LIU, H., KANNANGARA, R. M., JØRGENSEN, K., NEALE, R. L., BONDE, M., HEINZ, N., ZHU, W., WANG, S., ZHANG, Y., PAN, K., WEN, M., MA, P.-A., LI, Z., HU, M., LIAO, W., HU, W., ZHANG, S., PEI, J., GUO, A., GUO, J., ZHANG, J., ZHANG, Z., YE, J., OU, W., MA, Y., LIU, X., TALLON, L. J., GALENS, K., OTT, S., HUANG, J., XUE, J., AN, F., YAO, Q., LU, X., FREGENE, M., BECERRA LOPEZ-LAVALLE, L. A., WU, J., YOU, F. M., CHEN, M., HU, S., WU, G., ZHONG, S., LING, P., CHEN, Y., WANG, Q., LIU, G., LIU, B., LI, K. & PENG, M. 2014. Cassava genome from a wild ancestor to cultivated varieties. Nature Communications, 5, 1-5. Role in RTB: Cluster co-Leader DI1.2: Next Generation Breeding of Flagship Project FP1: Enhanced genetic resources. 89 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Ismail Yusuf RABBI Current position and affiliation: Cassava Genetics - International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) – Ibadan – Nigeria Profile: Genetics, Plant Breeding including Genomic Selection, Phenotyping. Employment: • 2011-present: Scientist (Cassava Genetics), International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan Nigeria • 2009-2011: Postdoctoral Fellow, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Nairobi, Kenya. Education: • 2009: PhD: Population Genetics and Plant Breeding, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart Germany • 2005: MSc: Biotechnology, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Rabbi, I. Y., Kulakow, P.A., Manu-Aduening, J.A., Dankyi, A.A., Asibuo, J.Y., Parkes, E.Y., Abdoulaye, T., Girma, G., Gedil, M.A., Ramu, P., Reyes, B., Maredia, M.K 2015. Tracking crop varieties using genotyping- by- sequencing markers: a case study using cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). BMC Genet. 16, 115. DOI: 10.1186/s12863-015-0273-1 2) Rabbi, I., Hamblin, M. & Gedil, M. 2014. Genetic Mapping Using Genotyping-by-Sequencing in the Clonally Propagated Cassava. Crop Science 54(4):1384-1396. doi:10.2135/cropsci2013.07.0482 3) Rabbi, I. Y., Hamblin, M.T., Lava Kumar, P., Gedil, M.A., Ikpan, A.S., Jannink, J.L., Kulakow, P.A. 2014. High- resolution mapping of resistance to cassava mosaic geminiviruses in cassava using genotyping-by- sequencing and its implications for breeding. Virus Res. 186, 87–96. doi:10.1016/j.virusres.2013.12.028 4) Rabbi, I. Y., Kulembeka, H. P., Masumba, E., Marri, P. R. & Ferguson, M. 2012. An EST-derived SNP and SSR genetic linkage map of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). Theor. Appl. Genet. 125(2):329-342. doi:10.1007/s00122-012-1836-4 5) Ly, D., Hamblin, M., Rabbi, I., Melaku, G., Bakare, M., Gauch, H.G., Okechukwu, R., Dixon, A.G.O., Kulakow, P., Jannink, J.L. 2013. Relatedness and Genotype × Environment Interaction Affect Prediction Accuracies in Genomic Selection: A Study in Cassava. Crop Sci. 53(4): 1312–1325. 6) International Cassava Genetic Map Consortium (ICGMC). 2015. High-Resolution Linkage Map and Chromosome-Scale Genome Assembly for Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) from Ten Populations. G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics. 5(1):133–144 doi:10.1534/g3.114.015008 7) Tecle, I. Y., Edwards, J.D., Menda, N., Egesi, C., Rabbi, I.Y., Kulakow, P., Kawuki, R., Jannink, J.L., Mueller, L.A. 2014. solGS: a web-based tool for genomic selection. BMC Bioinformatics 15, 398. doi:10.1186/ s12859-014-0398-7 8) Hamblin, M. T. and Rabbi, I. Y. 2014. The Effects of Restriction-Enzyme Choice on Properties of Genotyping- by-Sequencing Libraries: A Study in Cassava (Manihot esculenta). Crop Sci. 54(6):2603-2608. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Next Generation Cassava Breeding Project: Key member of the project leading implementation of genomic selection activities in IITA – Ibadan. • HarvestPlus Cassava Project: Leading the development of molecular markers associated with increased provitamin A content and improved phenotyping method. • Cassava Monitoring Study: Leading DNA-based variety identification in large-scale survey of 2500 households in Nigeria. • Targeted use of Genetic Diversity Project – (RTB Theme 1 and 2): Lead implementation of the cassava project in IITA. This project is now transitioning into “FP 1: Discovery: Enhanced genetic resources” in the new RTB Project Portfolio. • BREAD PHENO: iPheno – High-throughput phenotyping with smart phones: Lead App field testing and deployment with cassava breeding networks. This project will converge novel advances in image processing and machine vision to deliver transformative mobile applications through established breeder networks. Role in RTB: Cluster co-Leader DI1.2: Next Generation Breeding of Flagship Project FP1: Enhanced genetic resources. 90 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Marc GHISLAIN Current position and affiliation: Program Leader, International Potato Center (CIP) Profile: Marc Ghislain is a senior biotechnologist at the International Potato Center (CIP) leading one of the 6 research programs. He chairs the institutional biosafety committee and is a member of the intellectual property committee. His educational background includes agronomy and plant molecular biology. His research scope covers the use and characterization of wild relatives, genetic mapping trait of interests, isolation of genes and alleles, and their introgression into advanced germplasm by marker-assisted selection, genomics-assisted breeding, or transgenesis for the potato and the sweetpotato crops. In Africa, he develops transgenic potato with late blight resistance, sweetpotato with virus disease and weevil resistance, and contributes to apply genomics tools for sweetpotato breeding. Employment: • 2014 – present: Game Changing Solutions – Program Leader, CIP, Kenya • 2012-2014: Genomics & Biotechnology - Program Leader, CIP, Kenya • 1999-2011: Biotechnology advisor, CIP, Peru Education: • 1992: Ph.D. ‘Cell and Gene Biotechnology’ at the Free University of Brussels, Belgium • 1984: Eng. Agronomy at the Free University of Brussels, Belgium Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Rukarwa, R. J., K. Prentice, M. Ormachea, J. F. Kreuze, J. Tovar, S. B. Mukasa, G. Ssemakula, R. O. M. Mwanga, and M. Ghislain (2013). Evaluation of bioassays for testing Bt sweetpotato events against sweetpotato weevils. African Crop Science Journal 21: 235-244 2) Rukarwa R.J., Mukasa S.B., Odongo B., Ssemakula G and Ghislain M. (2014). Identification of relevant non-target organisms exposed to sweetpotato weevil-resistant Bt sweetpotato in Uganda. 3 Biotech, 4:217–226 3) Ghislain, M., Montenegro, J. D., Juarez, H., & del Rosario Herrera, M. (2015). Ex-post analysis of landraces sympatric to a commercial variety in the center of origin of the potato failed to detect gene flow. Transgenic research, 24(3), 519-528. 4) Kyndt, T., Quispe, D., Zhai, H., Jarret, R., Ghislain, M., Liu, Q., Gheysen, G., and Kreuze, J.F. (2015). The genome of cultivated sweet potato contains Agrobacterium T-DNAs with expressed genes: An example of a naturally transgenic food crop. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA, 112(18), 5844-5849. 5) Orbegozo, J., Roman, M. L., Rivera, C., Gamboa, S., Tovar, J. C., Forbes, G. A., Lindqvist- Kreuze, H., Kreuze, J.F., & Ghislain, M. (2016). Rpi-blb2 gene from Solanum bulbocastanum confers extreme resistance to late blight disease in potato. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC), 1-13. 6) Schiek, B., Hareau, G., Baguma, Y., Medakker, A., Douches, D., Shotkoski, F., and Ghislain, M. (2016). Demystification of GM crop costs: releasing late blight resistant potato varieties as public goods in developing countries. International Journal of Biotechnology in press. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader DI1.3: Game Changing Traits of Flagship Project FP1: Enhanced genetic resources. 91 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Mohammad Ehsan DULLOO Current position and affiliation: Component Leader, Effective Genetic Resources Conservation and Use, Bioversity International. Profile: Biodiversity Conservation (in situ and ex situ), plant genetic resources, crop wild relatives, genebank management, protected areas management, invasive species, island ecology, ecological restoration Employment • 2012-present: Programme /Component Leader (Conservation and availability), Bioversity International, Rome, Italy (since 2016 based in Mauritius) • 2011-2012: Senior Policy officer (Plant Genetic Resources)-(P-5), FAO, Rome, Italy. • 1999-2011: Scientist/Senior Scientist, Agricultural Biodiversity Conservation, Bioversity International, Nairobi/Rome, Italy. • 1996-1999: Plant Conservation Manager -GEF/World Bank, Biodiversity restoration project, Mauritian Wildlife Foundation, Mauritius. Education • 1998: Ph.D., Diversity and conservation of wild Coffea germplasm in the Mascarene Islands. University of Birmingham, UK. • 1990: M.Sc, Conservation and Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources, University of Birmingham, UK. Selected recent peer-reviewed publications 1) Redden, R., Yadav, S.S., Maxted, N., Dulloo, M.E., Guarino, L. and Smith, P. (eds) (2015) Crop Wild Relatives and Climate Change. Wiley-Blackwell 400 pages. ISBN: 978-1-118-85433-4 (Book editor) 2) Dulloo, M.E., Hunter, D. and Leaman, D. (2014) Plant Diversity in Addressing Food, Nutrition and Medicinal Needs, IN: Novel Plant Bioresources: Applications in Food, Medicine and Cosmetics (ed A. Gurib- Fakim), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK. doi: 10.1002/9781118460566. ch1 (Book Chapter) 3) Dulloo M.E. Thormann I., Fiorino E., De Felice S., Rao V.R., and Snook L. (2013). Trends in Research using Plant Genetic Resources from Germplasm Collections: From 1996 to 2006. Crop Science doi: 10.2135/cropsci2012.04.0219; Posted online 15 Feb. 2013. (Peer review journal) 4) Pereira H. M., S. Ferrier, M. Walters, G. N. Geller, R. H. G. Jongman, R. J. Scholes, M.,W. Bruford, N. Brummitt, S. H. M. Butchart, A. C. Cardoso, N. C. Coops, E. Dulloo, D.P. Faith, J. Freyhof, R. D. Gregory, C. Heip, R. Höft, G. Hurtt, W. Jetz, D. Karp, M. A.,McGeoch, D. Obura, Y. Onoda, N. Pettorelli, B. Reyers, R. Sayre, J. P. W. Scharlemann, S. N. Stuart, E. Turak, M. Walpole, M. Wegmann (2013). Essential Biodiversity Variables. Science 339: 277-278. (Peer review journal) 5) Dulloo M.E. (2013). Global challenges for agricultural plant biodiversity and international collaboration. IN Normah M.N., Chin H.F, and Reed B.M. (Eds). Conservation of tropical plant species. Springer New York Heidelberg Dordrecht London. Chapter 19, Pp 491-510. (Book chapter) 6) Maxted N., Dulloo M.E., Ford-Lloyd B.V., Frese L., Iriondo J., Pinheiro de Carvalho M A.A., (2012). Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces. CABI Publishing, Wallingford (Book editor) 7) Dulloo M.E, Hunter D. and Borelli T. (2010). Ex Situ and In Situ Conservation of Agricultural Biodiversity: Major Advances and Research Needs. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj 38(2) special issue: 123- 135. (peer review journal) Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery • 2004-2011- Led major global projects – (Bioversity project on Complementary conservation strategies for PGRFA; Global programme on intermediate and recalcitrant forest tree seeds; World Bank/GEF project on biodiversity restoration) • 2006: Zayed International Prize for the Environment in the category of “Scientific Achievements in the Environment” (www.zayedprize.org) – as part of the team (as lead author) of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment on crop biodiversity • 2009: Winner of World Bank Development Marketplace Award 2009 for project proposal on adapting to climate change: innovation tools to match seeds to needs of women farmers in Ethiopia. Role in RTB: Cluster co-Leader DI1.4: Genetic diversity of Flagship Project FP1: Enhanced genetic resources. 92 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Michael ABBERTON Current position and affiliation: Head, Genetic Resources Centre, IITA Profile: Plant breeding, genetic resources, climate change Employment: • 2012-current: Head, Genetic Resources Centre, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan Nigeria • 2010- 2012: Director of International Development IBERS Chair in Public Good Plant Breeding, Aberystwyth University • 2008-2010: Head, Crop Breeding and Genomics IBERS, Aberystwyth University Head, Genome Diversity and Plant Breeding • 2007-2008: Programme Leader, Plant Breeding and Genetics, Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research Education • 1984: BSc Hons Degree in Botany 1st Class, and D.H. Valentine Prize, University of Manchester, UK • 1988: PhD, “Chromosome specific behaviour in an autopolyploid series”, University of Manchester, UK Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: • Istvan Nagy, Susanne Barth, Jeanne Mehenni-Ciz, Michael T Abberton, Dan Milbourne. A hybrid next generation transcript sequencing-based approach to identify allelic and homeolog-specific single nucleotide polymorphisms in allotetraploid white clover (2013) BMC Genomics 02/2013; 14(1):100. • Yates, S. , Swain, M. , Hegarty, M. , Chernukin, I. , Lowe, M. , Allison, G. , Ruttink, T. , Abberton, M. , Jenkins, G. , Skot, L. (2014). De novo assembly of red clover transcriptome based on RNA-Seq data provides insight into drought response, gene discovery and marker identification. BMC Genomics, 15, 453, 1 - 33, ISSN 1471-2164, 2014 • Shitta, N. S. Abberton, M. , Adesoye, A. I. , Adewale, D. B. , Oyatomi, O. (2015) Analysis of genetic diversity of African yam bean using SSR markers derived from cowpea. Plant Genetic Resources: Characterization and Utilization, pages 1 - 7, ISSN 1479-2621, 2015. • Abberton M., Batley J., Bentley A., Bryant J., Cai H., Cockram J., Costa de Oliveira A., Cseke L.J., Dempewolf H., De Pace C., Edwards D., Gepts P., Greenland A., Hall A.E., Henry R., Hori K., Howe G.T., Hughes S., Humphreys M., Lightfoot D., Marshall A., Mayes S., Nguyen H.T., Ogbonnaya F.C., Ortiz R., Paterson A.H., Tuberosa R., Valliyodan B., Varshney R.K., Yano M. (2015). Global agricultural intensification during climate change: a role for genomics. Plant Biotechnology Journal, doi: 10.1111/pbi.12467 • Kole C., Muthamilarasan M., Henry R., Edwards D., Sharma R., Abberton M., Batley J., Bentley A., Blakeney M., Bryant J., Cai H., Cakir M., Cseke L.J., Cockram J., de Oliveira A.C., De Pace C., Dempewolf H., Ellison S., Gepts P., Greenland A., Hall A., Hori K., Hughes S., Humphreys M.W., Iorizzo M., Ismail A.M., Marshall A., Mayes S., Nguyen H.T., Ogbonnaya F.C., Ortiz R., Paterson A.H., Simon P.W., Tohme J., Tuberosa R., Valliyodan B., Varshney R.K., Wullschleger S.D., Yano M., Prasad M. (2015) Application of genomics- assisted breeding for generation of climate resilient crops: progress and prospects. Frontiers in Plant Science. 6(563) 1— 16 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Delivery of plant breeding programs, large multinational projects and large UK funded projects including public-private partnerships Role in RTB: Cluster co-Leader DI1.4: Genetic diversity of Flagship Project FP1: Enhanced genetic resources. 93 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 FP2: Productive varieties/quality seed 94 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Elmar SCHULTE-GELDERMANN Current position and affiliation: Program Leader: CIP Strategic Objective 3-Seed Potato for Africa Profile: Seed systems, rapid propagation technologies, seed degeneration, germplasm evaluation, integrated pest and disease management, soil fertility and soil health management, project and program management Employment: • 2014-present: International Potato Center: Program Leader: CIP Strategic Objective 3-Seed Potato for Africa; • 2012 -2014: International Potato Center: Potato Science Leader- SSA; • 2009 -2012: International Potato Center: Integrated Crop Management Scientist • 2003-2009: Researcher at the departments of “Plant Protection” and “Organic Farming and Cropping Systems”, at the University of Kassel, Germany. Education: • 2008: PhD, University Kassel, Witzenhausen. Management approaches in organic potato and tomato production -Interactive impacts of agronomic measures on plant nutrition, plant health and yield. • 2003: Master of Science (Dipl. Agraringenieur), University of Kassel, Witzenhausen. Management strategies to control late blight studies in organic agricultural science. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) E. Schulte-Geldermann, P.R. Gildemacher and P. Struik, 2015: Improving Seed Health and Seed Performance by Positive Selection in Three Kenyan Potato Varieties. In: Potato and Sweetpotato in Africa: Transforming the Value Chains for Food and Nutrition Security, p.. 254-260 2) P. Demo, B. Lemaga, R. Kakuhenzire, S. Schulz, D. Borus, I. Barker, G. Woldegiorgis, M.L. Parker and E. Schulte-Geldermann. 2015: Strategies to Improve Poor Seed Potato Quality and Supply in Sub- Saharan Africa: Experience from Interventions in Five Countries In: Potato and Sweetpotato in Africa: Transforming the Value Chains for Food and Nutrition Security, p. 155-167 3) Okello, J.J., Kwikiriza, N., Kakuhenire, R., Parker, M., Schulte-Geldermann, E. and Pambo, K., 2015. Micro and meso-level issues affecting potato production and marketing in the tropical highlands of Sub-Saharan Africa: The known and the unknowns (No. 205464). Agricultural and Applied Economics Association. 4) Nopsa, J.F., Xing, Y., Andrade-Piedra, J., Beed, F., Bloome, G., Carvajal Yepes, M., Forbes, G., Kreuze, J., Kroschel, J., Legg, J., Parker, M., Schulte-Geldermann, E. Garret K.A., 2014. Global crop connectivity as a risk factor for pathogen and pest invasion: the case of banana, cassava, potato, and sweetpotato. In PHYTOPATHOLOGY (Vol. 104, No. 11, pp. 51-51). 5) Smith, J.J., Coyne, D. and Schulte-Geldermann, E., 2013. 8 Challenges for the improvement of seed systems for vegetatively propagated crops in Eastern Africa. Agro-Ecological Intensification of Agricultural Systems in the African Highlands, p.105. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: At CIP Principal Investigator (PI) or co-PI of 11 bilaterally funded projects with a value of $US 12m covering 8 sub-Saharan Africa countries, reaching more than 250,000 farming households. Scientific supervision to projects inclusive of significant contribution to successful proposal development to 12 further projects with a value of $US 17.5m. Further to this I am member of the CIP Executive Committee (2016), the Science Leader Team (2014 - present) and the SSA Regional Management Team (2014 - present). Role in RTB: Flagship Leader FP2: Adapted productive varieties and quality seed of RTB crops. 95 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Jorge ANDRADE-PIEDRA Current position and affiliation: Potato Seed and Late Blight Specialist, International Potato Center (CIP) Profile: Epidemiologist, International Potato Center. Employment: • 2013– Present: Potato Seed and Late Blight Specialist and Global Leader of Theme 4 (High Quality Planting Material) for the CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas. International Potato Center (Lima, Peru). • 2012–2013: Project Coordinator ISSAndes: Strengthening pro poor agricultural innovation for food security in the Andean region (regional project in Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru). International Potato Center (Quito, Ecuador). • 2006-2011: Project Coordinator. InnovAndes: Strengthening capacity for innovation and poverty alleviation in the Andes (regional project in Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru). International Potato Center (Quito, Ecuador). • 2005-2006: Post-doctorate Associate. Epidemiology of potato late blight (Phytophthora infestans) in the tropical highlands, training of scientists and extension workers. International Potato Center (Quito, Ecuador). Education: • 2004, Ph.D. in Plant Pathology (minors in Epidemiology and International Agriculture). Cornell University (Ithaca, New York, USA) • 2000, M.Sc. in Plant Pathology. Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina (Lima, Peru). Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Thomas-Sharma, S., Abdurahman, A., Ali, S., Andrade-Piedra, J.L., Bao, S., Charkowski, A.O., Crook, D., Kadian, M., Kromann, P., Struik, P.C., Torrance, L., Garrett, K.A., and Forbes, G.A. 2015. Seed degeneration in potato: The need for an integrated seed health strategy to mitigate the problem in developing countries. Plant Pathology 65:3-16 (doi: 10.1111/ppa.12439). 2) Mateus-Rodriguez, J.R., De Haan, S., Andrade-Piedra, J.L., Maldonado, L., Hareau, G., Barker, I., Chuquillanqui, C., Otazú, V., Frisancho, R., Bastos, C., Pereira, A.S., Medeiros, C.A., Montesdeoca, F., and Benitez, J. 2013. Technical and economic analysis of aeroponics and other systems for potato mini-tuber production in Latin America. American Journal of Potato Research 90:357-368 (doi: 10.1007/s12230-013- 9312-5) 3) Kromann, P., Pérez, W., Taipe, A., Schulte-Geldermann, E., Andrade-Piedra, J. and Forbes, G. 2012. Use of phosphonate to manage foliar potato late blight in developing countries. Plant Disease 96:1008-1015. 4) Horton, D., Thiele, G., Oros, R., Andrade-Piedra, J., Velasco, C., and Devaux, D. 2011. Knowledge management for pro-poor innovation: the Papa Andina case. Knowledge Management for Development Journal 7:65-83. 5) Blandón-Díaz, J. U., Forbes, G.A., Andrade-Piedra, J.L., and Yuen, J. E. 2011. Assessing the adequacy of the simulation model LATEBLIGHT under Nicaraguan conditions. Plant Disease 95:839-846. 6) Thiele, G., Devaux, A., Reinoso, R., Pico, H., Montesdeoca, F. Pumisacho, M., Andrade-Piedra, J.L., Velasco, C., Flores, P., Esprella, R., Thomann, A., Manrique, K., and Horton,.D. 2011. Multi-stakeholder platforms for linking small farmers to value chains: evidence from the Andes. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 9:423-433. 7) Cavatassi, R., Gonzalez, M., Winters, P., Andrade-Piedra, J.L., Espinosa, P. and Thiele, G. 2011. Linking Smallholders to the New Agricultural Economy: the case of the Plataformas de concertación in Ecuador. Journal of Agricultural Economics 47:1545-1573. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Part of the Papa Andina team in Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru from 2005 to 2013. Main results are described here. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CC2.1: Quality seeds and access to improved varieties of Flagship Product 2: Productive varieties and quality seed. 96 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Inge VAN DEN BERGH Current position and affiliation: Senior scientist, Bioversity International Profile: • Participatory multi-location evaluation and selection of banana cultivars for more sustainable production and food systems • Evaluation and promotion of banana diversity to reduce vitamin A deficiency • Coordination of banana networking and knowledge sharing platform ProMusa (www.promusa.org) • 18 years of progressively responsible experience in project management Employment: • 2014 – present: Senior Scientist and ProMusa Coordinator, Bioversity International, Belgium • 2007 – 2013: Scientist and ProMusa Coordinator, Bioversity International, France • 2002 – 2006: Associate Scientist, Technology Transfer, VVOB-INIBAP, Philippines • 1997 – 2001: Associate Expert, Nematology, VVOB-INIBAP, Vietnam Education: • 2002: PhD in Applied Biological Sciences, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium • 1997: Agronomic Engineer, Phytotechnics - Tropical Agriculture, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Ekesa, B, Nabuuma, D, Blomme, G, and Van den Bergh, I. 2015. Provitamin A carotenoid content of unripe and ripe banana cultivars for potential adoption in Eastern Africa. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 43:1-6. 2) M. Kamira, R.J. Crichton, J.-P. Kanyaruguru, P.J.A. van Asten, G. Blomme, J. Lorenzen, E. Njukwe, I. Van den Bergh, E. Ouma, and P. Muchunguzi. 2013. Agronomic evaluation of common and improved dessert banana cultivars at different altitudes across Burundi. Chapter 5. p.37-47. In: Banana Systems in the Humid Highlands of Sub-Saharan Africa - Enhancing Resilience and Productivity. CABI. 3) Herradura L.E., Lobres M.A.N., De Waele D., Davide R.G. and Van den Bergh I. 2012. Yield response of four popular banana varieties from southeast Asia to infection with a population of Radopholus similis from Davao, Philippines. Nematology 14(7): 889-897. 4) Staver C., Van den Bergh I., Karamura E., Blomme G. and Lescot T. 2010. Targeting actions to improve the quality of farmer planting material in bananas and plantains – building a national priority-setting framework. Tree and Forestry Science and Biotechnology 4 (Special Issue 1): 1-10. 5) Davey M.W., Van den Bergh I., Markham R., Swennen R. and Keulemans J. 2009. Genetic variability in Musa fruit provitamin A carotenoids and mineral micronutrient contents. Food Chemistry 115: 806-813. 6) Gervacio D.D., Dawi N.M., Fabregar E.G., Molina A.B. and Van den Bergh I. 2008. Agronomic performance of selected local and introduced banana cultivars (Musa spp.) under commercial management practices in Davao, Philippines. Philippine Journal of Crop Science 33(3): 71-81. For more publications: see http://www.musalit.org/index.php?nomAuth=Van%20den%20Bergh,%20I Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Banana Science Domain leader and RTB focal point for Bioversity; Coordinator of International Musa Testing Program; Coordinator of ProMusa global knowledge sharing network; Leader of work package on cultivar evaluation of BMGF grant on breeding East African highland bananas Role in RTB: Cluster co-Leader BA2.2: Matching banana cultivars and hybrids with farmers’, consumers’ and markets’ needs, for more sustainable food and production systems of Flagship Product 2: Productive varieties and quality seed. 97 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Rony, SWENNEN Current position and affiliation: Banana breeder (IITA) and banana genetic resources (Bioversity International), professor KU Leuven University, Belgium Profile: breeding, physiology, molecular biology, gene discovery, in vitro culture, agronomy, international varietal testing Banana and plantain breeding since 1979 resulting in the King Badouin Award for IITA in 1994 for the development of black Sigatoka resistant plantains and a postal stamp in Nigeria. His banana germplasm collecting resulting in the foundation of the International Transit Collection creation in 1985, now under Bioversity International. He was pivotal in the securing of the International status of Bioversity International in Belgium. He developed the first transgenic bananas in the early 1990s. Collaborative research led to large scale impact on Tanzania on more than 0.5 mio banana farmers (Cooperation Excellence Award in November 2010 given by The United Nations’ annual Global South-South Development Expo), in India (Kadali Puraskar in 2009, in “recognition of his vision and services rendered for the improvement of banana and plantain”) and Pisang Raja Award in 2000 given by all the national banana programs in Asia, in recognition of 21 years of outstanding accomplishment in banana breeding and biotechnology, and also for profound contribution to INIBAP and ASPNET, and in Nigeria with a Chieftancy 1991 for contributions in South East Nigeria. Employment: • 2013-to date: Banana breeder (IITA) and banana genetic resources (Bioversity International), professor KU Leuven University, Belgium • 1990-2013: professor KU Leuven University, Belgium and honorary research fellow Bioversity International • 1982-1990: plantain agronomist/breeder at IITA • 1979-1982: FAO plantain agronomist/breeder based at IITA Education: • 1984: PhD, Plantain physiology, KULeuven University, Belgium • 1978: MSc, Plant physiology and soil science, KULeuven University, Belgium Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Janssens, S.B., Vandelook, F., De Langhe, E., Verstraete, B., Smets, E., Van den houwe, I., and Swennen, R. 2015. Evolutionary dynamics and biogeography of Musaceae reveal a correlation between the diversification of the banana family and the geological and climatic history of Southeast Asia. New Phytologist. doi: 10.1111/nph.13856 2) Cizkova, J., Hribova, E., Christelova, P., Van den houwe, I., Hakkinnen, M., Roux, N., Swennen, R., and Dolezel, J. 2015. Molecular and cytogenetic characterization of wild Musa species. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0134096. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0134096 3) Vanhove, A.-C., Vermaelen, W., Swennen, R., and Carpentier, S. 2015. A look behind the screens: Characterization of the HSP70 family during osmotic stress in a non-model crop. Journal of Proteomics, 119, 10- 20. 10.1016/j.jprot.2015.01.014. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1874391915000238 4) Hoelscher, D., Suganthagunthalam, D., Alexandrov, T., Becker, M., Bretschneider, T., Buerkert, A., Crecelius, A.C., De Waele, D., Elsen, A., Heckel, D.G., Heklau, H., Hertweck, C., Kai, M., Knop, K., Krafft, C., Maddula, R.K., Matthäus, C., Popp, J., Schneider, B., Schubert, U.S., Sikora, R.A., Svatos, A., and Swennen, R. 2014. Phenalenone-type phytoalexins mediate resistance of banana plants (Musa spp.) to the burrowing nematode Radopholus similis. PNAS, 111(1), 105-110. http://www.pnas.org/content/111/1/105 5) Ortiz, R., and Swennen, R. 2014. From crossbreeding to biotechnology-facilitated improvement of banana and plantain. Biotechnology Advances, 32, 158-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2013.09.010 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Leads the Bill & Melinda Gates project “Improvement of banana for smallholder farmers in the Great Lakes Region of Africa”, implemented in Uganda and Tanzania • Lead the banana research at IITA from 1979-1990. • Co-Lead the Belgian Technical Cooperation project “PROPAGATION AND DIFFUSION OF SUPERIOR BANANA PLANTS, 1994-2012, implemented over the entire Kagera region, NW-Tanzania • Lead the operations of the International Transit Centre of Bioversity International from 1990 till 2012. Role in RTB: Cluster co-Leader BA2.2: Matching banana cultivars and hybrids with farmers’, consumers’ and markets’ needs, for more sustainable food and production systems of Flagship Product 2: Productive varieties and quality seed. 98 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Hernán CEBALLOS Current position and affiliation: Cassava Breeder, CIAT Profile: Plant Breeding and Quantitative Genetics; Maize and cassava breeding; Root quality traits; Resistance to pest and diseases; Screening/developing for new starch functional properties; Breeding for abiotic stresses. Education: • 1980: Ing. Agrónomo. Agronomy and Crop Production, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina. • 1987: Ph.D., Plant Breeding Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA Employment ● January 1999 - present: Cassava breeder and Leader of Cassava Project (since 1999 through 2012) at the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). Cali, Colombia. ● 1994–2007: Associate Professor, Universidad Nacional de Colombia (Palmira Campus) and Plant Breeding Graduate School Coordinator. Director of M.S. and Ph.D. theses, lecturer of three graduate courses: 1) Quantitative Genetics; 2) Breeding for Biotic and Abiotic Stresses and 3) Methods of Plant Breeding. ● 1987-1994: Maize breeder at International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), in Mexico and Colombia. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications 1) ● Morante, N., H. Ceballos, T. Sánchez, A. Rolland-Sabaté, F. Calle, C.Hershey, O. Gibert, and D. Dufour. 2016. Discovery of new spontaneous sources of amylose-free cassava starch and analysis of their structure and techno- functional properties. Accepted for publication in Food Hydrocolloids. 2) ● Ceballos, H., R.S. Kawuki, V.E. Gracen, G.C. Yencho and C.H. Hershey. 2015. Conventional breeding, marker assisted selection, genomic selection and inbreeding in clonally propagated crops: A case study for cassava. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 9:1647-1667. 3) ● Sánchez, T., H. Ceballos, D. Dufour, D. Ortiz, N. Morante, F. Calle, T. Zum Felde, and F. Davrieux. 2014. Carotenoids and dry matter Prediction by NIRS and hunter color in fresh cassava roots. Food Chemistry151: 444–451. 4) ● Ceballos, H., N. Morante, T. Sánchez, D. Ortiz, I. Aragón, A.L. Chávez, M. Pizarro, F. Calle, and D. Dufour. 2013. Rapid cycling recurrent selection for increased carotenoids content in cassava roots. Crop Science 53: 2342- 2351. 5) ● Sánchez, T., D. Dufour, J.L. Moreno, M. Pizarro, I. Arango, M. Domínquez, and H. Ceballos. 2013. Changes in extended shelf life of cassava roots during storage in ambient conditions. Postharvest Biology and Technology 86: 520–528. 6) ● Ceballos, H., C. Hershey and L.A. Becerra-López-Lavalle. 2012. New approaches to cassava breeding. Plant Breeding Reviews 36:427-504. 7) ● Welsch, R., J. Arango, C. Bär, B. Salazar, S, Al-Babili, J, Beltrán, P. Chavarriaga, H. Ceballos, J. Tohme and P. Beyer. 2010. Provitamin A - accumulation in cassava (Manihot esculenta) roots driven by a single nucleotide polymorphism in a phytoene synthase gene. The Plant Cell 22:3348-3356. Other Evidence of Leadership: 1) Chickpea, maize, and cassava breeding 2) Population improvement and development of maize inbred lines; 3) Advising national research programs from Africa, Asia and America in their breeding activities; 4) Basic research on the inheritance of different traits; 5) Management of field activities; 6) Directing M.S. and Ph.D. student theses; 7) Teaching graduate courses on Quantitative Genetics, Methods of Plant Breeding and Breeding for Biotic and Abiotic Stresses at National University of Colombia, University of Ghana, University of Kwazulu-Natal (South Africa), Makerere University (Uganda); 8) Leader of a research project involving the management of about 25 people; 9) Search for financial resources, writing research proposals and reports; 10) Breeding for high value traits in cassava (nutritional quality and starch functional properties); 11) Member of scientific advisory committees in large research projects; 12) National Award on the Technological Innovation. Awarded by the Colombian Association for the Advancement of Science in 2008. Role in RTB: Support Cluster Leader CA2.3 Added value cassava varieties in Flagship Project 2: Productive varieties and quality planting material. 99 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Monica L. PARKER Current position and affiliation: Scientist, Seed Potato for Africa Program, International Potato Center Profile: Program leadership for Seed Potato for Africa (SPA) to support program growth and country projects. Relevant experience includes strong background in plant pathology, disease diagnostics and horticulture, setting up sites for seed multiplication of horticultural crops, and supervising staff and student research related to seed systems and pathology. Employment • 2013-present: Scientist, International Potato Center, Kenya • 2012-2013: Post-Doctoral Fellow, University of Guelph, Canada • 2006-2007: Program Coordinator, Rwanda Flora Sarl, Rwanda • 2003-2005: Technical Assistant, Ministry of Agriculture, Rwanda. Education • 2012: PhD in Plant Pathology, University of Guelph, ON, Canada. • 1999: MSc in Plant Pathology, Simon Fraser University, BC, Canada. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications 1) Low, J., Nyongesa, M., Quinn, S. and Parker, M. (Eds) 2015. Potato and Sweetpotato in Africa – Transforming the Value Chains for Food and Nutrition Security, CAB International, Oxfordshire. 2) Demo, P., Lemaga, R., Kakuhenzire, R., Schulz, S., Borus, D., Barker, I., Woldegiorgis, G., Parker, M.L. and Schulte-Geldermann, E. 2015. Strategies to Improve Seed Potato Quality and Supply in Sub-Saharan Africa: Experience from Interventions in Five Countries. In: Low, J., Nyongesa, M., Quinn, S. and Parker, M. (Eds) Potato and Sweetpotato in Africa – Transforming the Value Chains for Food and Nutrition Security. 3) Broders, K. D., Parker, M.L., Melzer, M. S., Boland G. J. 2014. Phylogenetic diversity of Rhizoctonia solani associated with canola and wheat in Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. Plant Disease 98:1695-1701. 4) Parker, M.L., McDonald, M.R., and Boland, G.J. 2014. Assessment of spatial distribution of ascospores of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum for regional disease forecasting in carrots. Can J Plant Pathology 36:438-446. 5) Parker, M.L., McDonald, M.R., and Boland, G.J. 2014. Evaluation of air sampling and detection methods to quantify airborne ascospores of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Plant Disease 98:32-42. 6) McDonald, M.R., Gossen, B.D., Kora, C., Parker, M., and Boland, G.J. 2013. Using crop canopy modification to manage plant diseases. European J Plant Pathology 135:581-593. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery Project Leader: Accelerated Value Chain Development Project: Roots Crops Component. Funding: USAID. Budget: USD 4.2 million. Partners: Farm Input Promotions Africa, Kenya Agriculture and Livestock Research Organization, and county governments and extension. Currently rolling out the project in mobilization phase. SPA program support: manage awareness creation and fundraising for target SPA countries, and provide program support to country interventions in Tanzania, Mozambique, Malawi and Rwanda. Project Leader: Results Based Management pilot for PO2.4. Outcome was to clearly identify and start addressing program support needs with the goal to consolidate and analyze outputs, outcomes and impact from country interventions to the programmatic level. Developed reporting templates with goal to integrate into M&E platform to manage data and analyze program progress beyond project level. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader of PO2.4: Seed Potato for Africa of Flagship Project 2: Productive varieties and quality seed. 100 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Gregory FORBES Current position and affiliation: Program Leader, ‘Agile potato for Asia’, International Potato Center Profile: More than 25 years of research on potato crop protection and project management, areas of expertise include plant disease epidemiology, potato diseases and seed quality in RTB and capacity development. Employment: • 1988-present: Program Leader, plant pathologist, International Potato Center, Lima Peru • 1986-1988: Postdoctoral researcher, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Montpellier, France Education: • 1984: M.Sc. in Plant Pathology, Texas A&M University, USA • 1986: PhD in Plant Pathology, Texas A&M University, USA Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Goss, Erica M., Javier F. Tabima, David EL Cooke, Silvia Restrepo, William E. Fry, Gregory A. Forbes, Valerie J. Fieland, Martha Cardenas, and Niklaus J. Grünwald. 2014. “The Irish Potato Famine Pathogen Phytophthora Infestans Originated in Central Mexico rather than the Andes.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111 (24): 8791–96. 2) Lindqvist-Kreuze, Hannele, Manuel Gastelo, Willmer Perez, Gregory A. Forbes, David de Koeyer, and Merideth Bonierbale. 2014. “Phenotypic Stability and Genome-Wide Association Study of Late Blight Resistance in Potato Genotypes Adapted to the Tropical Highlands.” Phytopathology 104 (6): 624–33. 3) Njoroge, A. W., G. Tusiime, G. A. Forbes, and J. E. Yuen. 2015. “Displacement of US-1 Clonal Lineage by a New Lineage of Phytophthora Infestans on Potato in Kenya and Uganda.” Plant Pathology, September, n/a – n/a. doi:10.1111/ppa.12451. 4) Perez, Willmer, Miriam Ñahui, David Ellis, and Gregory Forbes. 2014. “Wide Phenotypic Diversity for Resistance to Phytophthora Infestans Found in Potato Landraces from Peru.” Plant Disease 98 (11): 1530– 33. 5) Pérez, W., M. Valverde, M. Barreto, J Andrade Piedra, and G Forbes. 2015. “Pests and Diseases Affecting Potato Landraces and Bred Varieties Grown in Peru under Indigenous Farming System.” Revista Latinoamericana de La Papa 19 (2): 31–43. 6) Sparks, Adam H., Gregory A. Forbes, Robert J. Hijmans, and Karen A. Garrett. 2014. “Climate Change May Have Limited Effect on Global Risk of Potato Late Blight.” Global Change Biology 20 (12): 3621–31. 7) Thomas-Sharma, S.; Abdurahman, A.; Ali, S.; Andrade-Piedra, J.L.; Bao, S.; Charkowski, A.O.; Crook, D.; Kadian, M.; Kromann, P.; Struik, P.C.; Torrance, L.; Garrett, K.A.; Forbes, G.A. 2016. “Seed Degeneration in Potato: The Need for an Integrated Seed Health Strategy to Mitigate the Problem in Developing Countries.” Plant Pathology 65(1): 3–16 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Coordinator - Global Initiative on Late Blight 2003 – 2010; organized 3 international workshops; managed scholarship and small grant fund. • Leader - RTB degeneration project 2012 – present; managed project, organized workshops, created data and communications structures • Leader 'Asia Potato Program' CIP 2014 – present; developed business plan, manage science Role in RTB: Cluster Leader PO2.5: Agile potato for Asia of Flagship Project 2: Productive Varieties and Quality Seed. 101 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Wolfgang GRUNEBERG Current position and affiliation: Sweetpotato Breeder and Geneticist Profile: Plant Breeding, Quantitative Genetics and Selection Theory, Sweet potato, Yam Bean, Canola, and Wheat Breeding. Employment: • 2014-current: Scientific employee at the International Potato Center (CIP) as sweetpotato breeder and geneticist leading the global sweetpotato breeding program with breeding platforms in Peru, West Africa (Benin), East Africa (Uganda), and southern Africa (Mozambique). • 2003-2004: Scientific employee for the International PhD program for Agricultural Sciences at Göttingen aiming at an association of the Universities Göttingen and Santa Clara / Cuba, long term lectureship for (i) Computer facilitated courses in statistics and (ii) Crop Evolution and development of breeding populations. • 2001-2003: Scientific employee at the Institute for Biometry and Population Genetics at the University Gießen / Germany) – Office at the Institute of Agronomy and Plant Breeding University / Göttingen. Tasks: Estimation of variance components of GxE interactions, GCA and SCA Variances as well as model calculations and simulation studies to optimise and compare line and hybrid canola breeding systems for the KWS Saat AG – research project: hybrid rape seed breeding. • 1997--2000: Scientific employee at the Institute of Agronomy and Plant Breeding (University Göttingen/ Germany). Tasks: leading the working group genetic resources within the frame of the DFG projects, Be1854/4-1, Be1854/4-2 und Be1854/4-3: Consideration of several traits in recurrent improvement of breeding populations by computer simulations and development of “Pre-breeding“ populations for legume root crops. Education: • 1993: PhD, Plant Breeding, University of Hannover, Faculty of Horticulture, Germany • 1987: Agronomist (degree equivalent to MSc), University Göttingen, Germany Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: (list 5-7 relevant publications as bullets; authors first, year of publication, title of article, journal reference and volume/page number). 1. Grüneberg W.J., D. Ma, R.O.M. Mwanga, E.E. Carey, K. Huamani, F. Diaz, R. Eyzaguirre, E. Guaf, M. Jusuf, A. Karuniawan, K. Tjintokohadi, Y.-S. Song, S.R. Anil, M. Hossain, E. Rahaman, S.I. Attaluri, K. Somé, S.O. Afuape, K. Adofo, E. Lukonge, L. Karanja, J. Ndirigwe, G. Ssemakula, S. Agili, J.M. Randrianaivoarivony, M. Chiona, F. Chipungu, S.M. Laurie, J. Ricardo, M. Andrade, F. Rausch Fernandes, A.S. Mello, M.A. Khan, D.R. Labonte, and G.C. Yencho. 2015. Advances in sweetpotato breeding from 1992 to 2012. In: Potato and Sweetpotato in Africa – Transforming the Value Chains for Food and Nutrition Security (Low J., M. Nyongesa, S Quinn, and M. Parker, Eds.) CAB International, pp. 3-68. 2. Grüneberg W.J., Mwanga R., Andrade M. and Espinoza J., 2009. Selection methods Part 5: Breeding clonally propagated crops. In: S. Ceccarelli, E.P. Guimarães, E. Weltzien (eds) Plant breeding and Farmer Participation, 275 – 322. 3. Zanklan, A. S., S. Ahouangonou, H.C. Becker, E. Pawelzik, and W.J. Grüneberg. 2007. Evaluation of the Storage-Root-Forming Legume Yam bean (Pachyrhizus spp) under West African Conditions. Crop Science, Vol. 47, 1934 – 1946. 4. Grüneberg W.J., K. Manrique, Z. Dapeng, M. Hermann. 2005. Genotype x Environment Interactions for a Diverse Set of Sweetpotato Clones Evaluated across Varying Ecogeographic Conditions in Peru. Crop Science, Vol. 45, 2160 – 2171. 5. Grüneberg W.J., E. Abidin, P. Ndolo, C.A. Pereira, M. Hermann. 2004. Variance component estimations and allocation of resources for breeding sweetpotato under East African conditions. Plant Breeding Vol. 123, 311 – 315 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Leading the sweetpotato breeding team within the SASHA project. Leading the project: Enhancing the nutrient-rich Yam Bean (Pachyrhizus spp.) to improve food quality and availability and sustainability of farming systems in Central- and West Africa” budget 4.7 Mio EURO. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader 2.6: User preferred sweetpotato varieties and seed technologies of Flagship Project 2: Productive varieties and quality seed. 102 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 FP2: Productive varieties/quality seed 103 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: James LEGG Current position and affiliation: Senior Scientist, IITA, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Profile: • Research for development primarily on cassava virus diseases and their vectors; wide range of field, screenhouse and laboratory-based approaches involving studies of virus-vector interactions, virus characterization, epidemiology, molecular ecology, bioinformatics, biological control, IPM, seed systems. • Leadership of bilateral projects, student supervision and working with a diverse range of governmental, NGO and private sector partners. Most of the work is based in East, Southern and Central Africa, but strong research linkages have been built up over time with a global network of research partners. • Senior mentoring role currently supervising 1 post-doctoral fellow, 5 PhD and 5 MSc students. Employment: • 2008-2015: Senior Scientist, IITA, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania • 2000-2008: Senior Scientist, NRI/IITA, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania • 1998-1999: Associate Scientist, IITA, Kampala, Uganda • 1995-1997: Post-doctoral Fellow, IITA, Kampala, Uganda Education: • 1995: PhD, Whiteflies and geminiviruses, University of Reading, United Kingdom. • 1989: MSc, Crop Protection, University of Reading, United Kingdom. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: (list 5-7 relevant publications as bullets; authors first, year of publication, title of article, journal reference and volume/page number). 1) Legg, J. P., Lava Kumar, P., Makeshkumar, T., Ferguson, M., Kanju, E., Ntawuruhunga, P., Tripathi, L. and Cuellar, W. (2015). Cassava virus diseases: biology, epidemiology and management. Advances in Virus Research. 91, 85-142. DOI: 10.1016/bs.aivir.2014.10.001. 2) Patil B. L., Legg, J. P., Kanju, E. and Fauquet, C. M. (2015). Cassava brown streak disease: A threat to food security in Africa. Journal of General Virology. DOI: 10.1099/jgv.0.000014. 3) Legg, J. P., Sseruwagi, P., Boniface, S., Okao-Okuja, G., Shirima, R., Bigirimana, S., Gashaka, G., Herrmann, H. -W., Jeremiah, S. C., Obiero, H. M., Ndyetabula, I., Tata-Hangy, W., Masembe, C. and Brown, J. K. (2014). Spatio- temporal patterns of genetic change amongst populations of cassava Bemisia tabaci whiteflies driving virus pandemics in East and Central Africa. Virus Research 186, 61-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2013.11.018. 4) Legg, J. P., Somado, E. A., Barker, I., Beach, L., Ceballos, H., Cuellar, W., Elkhoury, W., Gerling, D., Helsen, J., Hershey, C., Jarvis, A., Kulakow, P., Kumar, L., Lorenzen, J., Lynam, J., McMahon, M., Maruthi, G., Miano, D., Mtunda, K., Ntawuruhunga, P., Okogbenin, E., Pezo, P., Terry, E., Thiele, G., Thresh, M., Wadsworth, J., Walsh, S., Winter, S., Tohme, J., & Fauquet, C. (2014). A global alliance declaring war on cassava viruses in Africa. Food Security 6, 231-248. 5) Legg, J. P. (2012). Cassava Diseases: Ecology and Control. In Encyclopedia of Pest Management. Taylor and Francis, London, UK. DOI: 10.1081/E-EPM-120041170. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Led a regional program on cassava mosaic disease mitigation for ten years from 1999 to 2008. Managed large components of multi-partner projects tackling cassava viruses from 2006 to 2012. Co- ordinated seed systems work of the BMGF-funded 5CP project from 2013 to present. Role in RTB: Flagship Leader 3: Resilient Crops, RTB Center Focal Point & former Leader of Theme 3: Pests and Diseases (2014-2015). 104 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Guy BLOMME Current position and affiliation: Scientist, Integrated Banana Systems, Bioversity International, Addis Ababa Office, c/o ILRI, P.O.Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, Email G.Blomme@CGIAR.org Profile: Plant pathology, plant protection, disease epidemiology, integrated pest and disease management, integrated crop management, plant bacterial diseases. Employment: • 2008-current: Scientist Integrated Banana Systems, Musa IPM, germplasm and agronomy, Bioversity International, Uganda and Ethiopia. • 2000–2007: VVOB Associate Expert; Assistant of the INIBAP (International Network for the Improvement of Banana and Plantain) regional coordinator for east and southern Africa. Bioversity International, Uganda. • 1995-1999: VVOB Associate Expert and PhD student, Plantain agronomy and physiology, IITA High Rainfall station at Onne, south-eastern Nigeria. Education: • 2000: PhD, Agronomy, nematology and plant physiology, K.U. Leuven (Catholic University of Leuven), Belgium. • 1994: MSc, Agroforestry, Ecole Supérieure d'Agronomie Tropicale (Tropical Forestry), ENGREF (Ecole Nationale des Eaux et Forêts et du Génie Rural), Montpellier, France. • 1991: MSc, Nematology, K.U.Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Niyongere, C., P. Lepoint, T. Losenge, G. Blomme and E.M. Ateka 2015. TOWARDS UNDERSTANDING THE DIVERSITY OF BANANA BUNCHY TOP VIRUS IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION OF AFRICA. African Journal of Agricultural Research 10(7): 702-709. 2) Stainton, Daisy, Darren P. Martin, Brejnev M. Muhire, Samiuela Lolohea, Mana’ia Halafihi, Pascale Lepoint, Guy Blomme, Kathleen S. Crew, Murray Sharman, Simona Kraberger, Anisha Dayaram, Matthew Walters, David A. Collings, Batsirai Mabvakure, Philippe Lemey, Gordon W. Harkins, John E. Thomas, and Arvind Varsani 2015. The global distribution of Banana bunchy top virus reveals little evidence for frequent recent, human-mediated long distance dispersal events. Virus Evolution, 2015, 1(1): 1–16 3) Blomme, Guy, Kim Jacobsen, Walter Ocimati, Fen Beed, Jules Ntamwira, Charles Sivirihauma, Fred Ssekiwoko, Valentine Nakato, Jerome Kubiriba, Leena Tripathi, William Tinzaara, Flory Mbolela, Lambert Lutete, Eldad Karamura (2014). Fine-tuning banana Xanthomonas wilt control options over the past decade in East and Central Africa. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 139: 265–281. 4) Nakato, G.V., W. Ocimati, G. Blomme, K.K.M. Fiaboe and F. Beed 2014. Comparative importance of infection routes for banana Xanthomonas wilt and implications on disease epidemiology and management, Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology, DOI: 10.1080/07060661.2014.959059 5) Ocimati, W., V. Nakato, K.M. Fiaboe, F. Beed and G. Blomme. 2014. Incomplete systemic movement of Xanthomonas campestris pv. musacearum and the occurrence of latent infections in Xanthomonas wilt infected banana mats. Plant Pathology. Doi: 10.1111/ppa.12233 6) Swennen, Rony, Guy Blomme, Piet van Asten, Pascale Lepoint, Eldad Karamura, Emmanuel Njukwe, William Tinzaara, Altus Viljoen, Patrick Karangwa, Danny Coyne and Jim Lorenzen. 2013. Mitigating the impact of biotic constraints to build resilient banana systems in Central and Eastern Africa. In: B. Vanlauwe, P. van Asten and G. Blomme (Eds.). Agro-Ecological Intensification of Agricultural Systems in the African Highlands. Earthscan from Routledge. pp. 85-104. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Project coordination of a DFID-funded Banana integrated pest management project in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania (2000-2003); a USAID-funded Banana germplasm evaluation project in Tanzania and Mozambique (2003- 2005) and a DGD-Belgium-funded Banana R4D (CIALCA) project in Rwanda, Burundi and eastern DR Congo (the latter with a budget of 700,000 Euro per year)(2006 till 2015). Role in RTB: Support Cluster Leader CC3.1: Pest/diseases management, of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops. 105 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Jürgen KROSCHEL Current position and affiliation: Science Leader Agroecology/IPM, International Potato Center, Lima, Peru Profile: • Extensive expertise in R&D of sustainable agricultural systems in the tropics and subtropics with specialization in agronomy, entomology and integrated pest management; special interest in plant protection product development and climate change related pest risk assessments. • More than 25 years research and project management experiences in an international, multi-disciplinary, and multi-cultural environment in countries of Africa, Asia, and Latin America. • Strong competence in leading scientific research teams and building partnerships for collaborative research globally; proven fund-raising record. Strong networks with universities, national agricultural research institutes and the private sector globally. Employment: Since 2004 Science Leader sub-program Agroecology/IPM. International Potato Center (CIP), Peru. 2001-2004 Acting head/Professor (C4) for Plant Production in the Tropics and Subtropics. In 2003, appointed to apl. Professor in Agroecology. University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany. 1999-2000 Senior scientist/lecturer (C2) Entomology and Plant Production. Institute of Crop Science in the Tropics and Subtropics, University of Kassel/Witzenhausen, Germany. 1992-1998 Team leader/supra-regional project Ecology and Management of Parasitic Weeds. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Eschborn, Germany. Education: • 1997: Habilitation at the Faculty Agronomy, University of Hohenheim, Germany, Venia legendi in Agroecology. • 1993: PhD, Agricultural Sciences, University of Hohenheim, Germany. • 1987: Diploma, Agronomy, University of Hohenheim, Germany. Selected recent peer-reviewed publications: 1) Khadioli N., Z.E.H. Tonnang, E. Muchugu, G. Ong’amo, T. Achia, I. Kipchirchir, J. Kroschel, B. Le Ru (2014): Effect of temperature on the phenology of Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera, Crambidae); simulation of life-table parameters and visualization of spatial pest’s risk in Africa. Bulletin of Entomological Research 104: 809–822. 2) Parsa S., S. Morse, A. Bonifacio, T. C. B. Chancellor, B. Condori, V. Crespo-Pérez, S. L. A. Hobbs, J. Kroschel, M.N. Ba, F. Rebaudok, S. G. Sherwood, S. J. Vanek, E. Faye, M. A. Herrera, O. Dangles (2014): Obstacles to integrated pest management adoption in developing countries. PNAS 111 (10): 3889–3894. 3) Kroschel J., M. Sporleder, H.E.Z. Tonnang, H. Juarez, P. Carhuapoma, J.C. Gonzales, R. Simon (2013): Predicting climate change caused changes in global temperature on potato tuber moth Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller) distribution and abundance using phenology modeling and GIS mapping. J. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 170: 228-241. 4) Muijca, N. and J. Kroschel (2013): Pest intensity-crop loss relationships for the leafminer fly Liriomyza huidobrensis (Blanchard) in different potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) varieties. Crop Protection 47: 6-16. 5) Muijca N. and J. Kroschel (2011): Leafminer fly occurrence, distribution and parasitoid associations in field and vegetable crops along the Peruvian coast. Environmental Entomology 40(2): 217-230. 6) Kroschel J. and J. Zegarra (2013): Attract-and-kill as a new strategy for the management of the potato tuber moths Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller) and Symmetrischema tangolias (Gyen) in potato - evaluation of its efficacy under potato field and storage conditions. Pest Management Science 69: 1205-1215. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • RTB phase I/complementary project: Management of RTB-critical pests and diseases under changing climates, through risk assessment, surveillance and modeling. • BMZ-funded project: Predicting climate change induced vulnerability of African agricultural systems to major insect pests through advanced insect phenology modeling, and decision aid development for adaptation planning. • FONTAGRO-World Bank funded project: Developing and use of ecological approaches in pest management for enhancing sustainable potato production of resource-poor farmers in Andean regions of Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CC 3.1: Pests and diseases management of Flagship Project 3:Resilient Crops. 106 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Marie-Soleil TURMEL Current position and affiliation: Associate Scientist, Bioversity International Profile: Crop production systems, agroecology, integrated soil fertility management. Employment: • 2014 – present: Associate Scientist, Agroecology and Farming Systems, Bioversity International, Costa Rica • 2013 – 2014: Associate Scientist, Cropping Systems Agronomist, Global Conservation Agriculture Program, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico • 2011 – 2013: Post-Doctoral Fellow, Cropping Systems Agronomist, Global Conservation Agriculture Program, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico Education: • 2011, Doctor of Philosophy, Renewable Resources (Soil Science and Neotropical Environments), McGill University, Montreal, Canada • 2007, Master of Science, Plant Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Speratti, A, Turmel, M.-S., Wall, P., Calegari, A., Araujo, C.F., Peiretti, R.A. Giraudo. M.B., Violic, A., Govaerts, B., 2015. Conservation Agriculture in Latin America. In, Farooq, M. and K.H.M. Siddique (Eds). Conservation Agriculture. Springer International Publishing Switzerland. Pp 391-415. 2) Turmel, M.-S., Speratti, A., Verhulst, N., Govaerts, B. 2014. Crop residue management and soil health: a systems analysis. Agricultural Systems Vol. 134: 6-16 3) Entz, M.H., C. Welsh, S. Mellish, Y. Shen, S. Braman, M. Tenuta, M.S. Turmel, K. Buckley, K.C. Bamford and N. Holliday. 2014. The Glenlea organic rotation: A long-term systems analysis, in: Martin, R.C. and R. MacRae (Eds.), Managing Energy, Nutrients, and Pests in Organic Field Crops. Pp. 215-238, Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 4) Turmel, M.-S., Entz, M.H., Tenuta, M., May, W.E., Lafond, G.P. 2011. The influence of a long- term black medic (Medicago lupulina cv. ‘George’) cover crop on arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal colonization and nutrient uptake in flax (Linum usitatissimum) under zero-tillage management. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 91(6): 1071-1076. 5) Turmel, M.-S., Turner, B.L. and Whalen, J.K. 2011. Soil fertility and yield improvements in the System of Rice Intensification. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems Vol. 26 (3): 185-192. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Coordination of multi stakeholder innovation platforms (Sustainable Modernization of Traditional Agriculture (MasAgro), CIMMYT, Mexico. • Coordination of multi-country research and extension projects (FONTAGRO, Soil health in organic banana systems, 2014-2017). Role in RTB: Support Cluster Leader CC3.2: Sustainable Crop Production Systems of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops. 107 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Stefan HAUSER Current position and affiliation: Root and Tuber Systems Agronomist, IITA Profile: Agronomist in root & tuber crops, maize and plantain with focus on production agronomy, system improvement and sustainability. Additional expertise in complex tree crop multistrata systems (timber, cocoa, food crops), strong background in soil science, soil physics and soil ecology. Employment: • Sept 2011 – to date: Root and Tuber Systems Agronomist, IITA-HQ, Ibadan, Nigeria; • Feb 2007 – August 2011: Agronomist and country representative of IITA in DR Congo; • March 1993 – Jan 2007 Agronomist / soil scientist, IITA Humid Forest Station, Mbalmayo, Cameroon; • Jan 1988 – Feb 1993 Soil Physicist with KALI & SALZ AG posted to IITA, Ibadan, Nigeria Education: • PhD, (Doktor sci agr) 1987, Agriculture, Institut fuer Pflanzenbau, University of Goettingen, Germany; • MSc (Dipl Agr Ing) 1984 Agriculture, Institut fuer Pflanzenbau, University of Goettingen, Germany Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Norgrove, L., Hauser, S. (2015) Estimating the Consequences of Fire Exclusion for Food Crop Production, Soil Fertility, and Fallow Recovery in Shifting Cultivation Landscapes in the Humid Tropics. Environmental Management 55, 536-549. OPEN ACCESS 2) Vanlauwe, B., Coyne, D., Gockowski, J., Hauser, S., Huising, J., Masso, C., Nziguheba, G., Schut, M., Van Asten, P. (2014) Sustainable intensification and the African smallholder farmer. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 8 15–22. 3) Norgrove, L., Hauser, S. (2014) Improving plantain (Musa spp. AAB) yields on smallholder farms in West and Central Africa. Food Security. DOI 10.1007/s12571-014-0365-1.OPEN ACCESS 4) Hoff, H., Döll, P., Fader, M., Gerten, D., Hauser, S. Siebert, S. (2014) Water footprints of cities – indicators for sustainable consumption and production. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 18 213-226. OPEN ACCESS 5) Wendt, J.W., Hauser, S. (2013). An equivalent soil mass procedure for monitoring soil organic carbon in multiple soil layers. European J Soil Science 64, 58-65 6) Hauser, S., Norgrove, L., Asawalam, D.O., Schulz, S. (2012) Effect of land use change, cropping systems and soil type on earthworm cast production in West and Central Africa. European Journal of Soil Biology 49 47-54. 7) Hauser, S., Mekoa, C. and Ngo Kanga, F. 2012. The effects of burning forest biomass on the yield of the plantain (cv. Ebang, Musa spp. AAB, false horn) after hot-water and boiling – water treatment in southern Cameroon. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science. 58, 399-409. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Humidtropics Focal Point for IITA; Theme 5 leader in the old RTB, project leader REAFOR, ‘composante agricole’ DR Congo. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CC3.2: Crop production systems of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops. 108 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Eldad KARAMURA Current position and affiliation: Senior Scientist & Regional Representative, ESA region, Bioversity International Profile: As Senior Scientist - contribute to the development of the institutional research agenda and to coordinate the implementation of research and outcome-oriented activities in eastern and southern Africa, guided by the Result Framework; monitor the regional research agenda to achieve agreed performance indicators and contribute to the research outcomes. Expertise: Crop Science focus on pest and disease management and impact assesment methologies, including M&E and livelihoods framework analysis as management tools in smallholder perenial systems in east and central Africa; As Regional Representative- develop and support engagement strategies for fund raising and research & development partnerships to increase CG visibility and deliver impact at scale. Expertise: project planning and management based on participatory approaches and involving situation analyses, priority setting, developing strategic objectives (vision, mission, goals, purpose and outputs, outcomes and impacts); logical and results frameworks; project proposal development and implementation. Employment 2015-present: Senior Scientist & Regional Representative, Bioversity International, Kampala 2005- 2014: Senior Scientist & regional Coordinator, Bioversity International, Kampala 1997- 2004: Regional Coordinator (ESA), INIBAP, Kampala 1989-1996: Principal Research Officer, NARO-Uganda, Kampala Education 1983: MSc in Applied Entomology Imperial College, London, UK 1989: PhD in Acarology, Makerere University, Uganda Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications 1) J. Hodgetts, J. Hall, G. Karamura, M. Grant, D.J. Studholme, N. Boonham, E. Karamura and J.J. Smith (2015). Rapid, specific, simple, in-field detection of Xanthomonas campestris pathovar musacearum by loop- mediated isothermal amplification. Journal of Applied Microbiology; Volume 119, Issue 6, pages 1651– 1658, December 2015 2) G. Karamura, J. Smith, D. Studholme, Jerome Kubiriba and E. Karamura (2015). Comparative pathogenicity studies of the Xanthomonas vasicola species on maize, sugarcane and banana. African Journal of Plant Science. Vol. 9(9), pp. 385-400, September 2015 DOI: 10.5897/AJPS2015.1327, ISSN: 1996-0824 J 3) J.N. Nakakawa, J.Y.T. Mugisha, E. Karamura and M.W. Shaw. (2016?). A Mathematical Model for the Dynamics of Banana Xanthomonas Wilt with Vertical Transmission and infloresence infection. Mathematical Modelling and Analysis. In press. 4) Reuben Tendo Ssali • Andrew Kiggundu • Jim Lorenzen • Eldad Karamura •Wilberforce Tushemereirwe • Altus Viljoen (2013). Inheritance of resistance to Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense race 1 in bananas. Euphytica. DOI 10.1007/s10681-013-0971-6 5) Wellington Jogo, Eldad Karamura, William Tinzaara, Jerome Kubiriba & Anne Rietveld (2013). Determinants of Farm-Level Adoption of Cultural Practices for Banana Xanthomonas Wilt Control in Uganda. Journal of Agricultural Science. Vol. 5, No. 7; 2013 Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery Regional Coordination: Banana Research Network for eastern and Southern Africa (11 countries); McKnight BXW regional project (Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda) Role in RTB: Cluster Leader BA3.3: Banana fungal and bacterial diseases (BXW & Foc) of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops. 109 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Emmanuel WICKER Position: Researcher, CIRAD Profile: Plant pathologist/microbiologist, in the area of molecular epidemiology, population biology, pathogen adaptation to plant resistance Employment: • Jan 2016-present: Permanent research scientist, Joint Research Unit “Plant-Microbes-Environment Interactions” (UMR IPME), CIRAD, France. • Aug 2008-Dec 2015: Permanent research scientist, Joint Research Unit « Plant Communities and Biological Invaders in Tropical Environment » (UMR PVBMT), CIRAD, Reunion Island. • Feb 2002-Jul 2008: Permanent research scientist, Internal Research Unit « Agro-ecological Functioning and Performances of Horticultural Systems»; Head of the Phytobacteriology Lab; CIRAD, Martinique (F.W.I.). • Aug 1996-Jan 2002: Permanent engineer, Joint Research Unit BiO3P, UNIP-INRA, France. Education: • 2015: Habilitation to supervise research (“Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches” [HDR]) in Population Biology and Ecology, Université de la Réunion, France • 2001: PhD in Plant Biology and Agronomy, ENSA Rennes, France Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Pensec F, Lebeau A, Daunay M, Chiroleu F, Guidot A, Wicker E. 2015. Towards the Identification of Type III Effectors Associated with Ralstonia solanacearum Virulence on Tomato and Eggplant. Phytopathology 105:1529-1544. 2) Clarke CR, Studholme DJ, Hayes B, Runde B, Weisberg A, Cai R, Wroblewski T, Daunay M-C, Wicker E, Castillo JA, Vinatzer BA. 2015. Genome-Enabled Phylogeographic Investigation of the Quarantine Pathogen Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2 and Screening for Sources of Resistance Against Its Core Effectors. Phytopathology 105:597-607. 3) Deberdt P, Guyot J, Coranson-Beaudu R, Launay J, Noreskal M, Riviere P, Vigné F, Laplace D, Lebreton L, Wicker E. 2014. Diversity of Ralstonia solanacearum in French Guiana expands knowledge on the "emerging ecotype". Phytopathology 104:586-596. 4) N'Guessan CA, Abo K, Fondio L, Chiroleu F, Lebeau A, Poussier S, Wicker E, Kone D. 2012. So near and yet so far: the specific case of Ralstonia solanacearum populations from Cote d'Ivoire in Africa. Phytopathology 102:733- 740. 5) N'Guessan CA, Brisse S, Le Roux-Nio A-C, Poussier S, Koné D, Wicker E. 2013. Development of variable number of tandem repeats typing schemes for Ralstonia solanacearum, the agent of bacterial wilt, banana Moko disease and potato brown rot. Journal of Microbiological Methods 92:366-374. 6) Wicker E, Lefeuvre P, Cambiaire JCd, Lemaire C, Poussier S, Prior P. 2012. Contrasting recombination patterns and demographic histories of the plant pathogen Ralstonia solanacearum inferred from MLSA. ISME Journal 6:961- 974. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Co-leadership of the Project RESAUBER «Durable Management of Eggplant resistances to Ralstonia solanacearum» (2014-2016), CASDAR (French Ministry of Agriculture), 6 partners (France, Cameroon, USA). • Partner in the ACP-UE project « Development of Sustainable Integrated Disease Management strategies for vegetable crops in the Carribean » (2013-2015), which groups research teams from Trinidad-and-Tobago, St Vincent, Guyana, Martinique, USA, Reunion Island. • Partner of the Research Contract “Resistance of Solanaceae to Ralstonia solanacearum” (2007-2010), funded by CIRAD, INRA, AVRDC, and a 6 breeders Consortium (France, Netherlands) Role in RTB: FP3/BA3.3: Support Cluster leader BA3.3: Banana fungal & bacterial diseases (Foc/BXW) of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops. 110 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: George MAHUKU Current position and affiliation: Senior Plant Pathologist, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA); P.O. Box 34441, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; e-mail: g.mahuku@cgiar.org Profile: Over 20 years of research and development experience, 16 of which have been spent working for the CGIAR, mostly in Latin America and Africa. Have experience and expertise in Strategic planning and execution of research projects; Plant pathology & microbiology techniques; developing effective strategies for protectic crops from pathogens, developing integrated disease and pest management (IDPM) strategies suitable for smallholder farmers, including use of endophytes; building capacity of national partners in plant pathology. Employment: • 2015-current: Senior Plant Pathologist, IITA, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. • 2007-2015: Senior Maize Pathologist, CIMMYT, Texcoco, Mexico • 1998-2007: Senior Bean Pathologist, CIAT, Cali, Colombia. • 1997-1998: Senior Research Fellow, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, PEI, Canada. Education: • 1995: PHD, Plant Pathology, University of Guelph, Canada • 1991: MSc, Plant Pathology / Virology Texas A&M University, USA. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Grace, D., Mahuku, G., Hoffmann, V., Atherstone, C., Upadhyaya, H.D., and Bandyopadhyay, R. 2015. International agricultural research to reduce food risks: case studies on aflatoxins. Food Security DOI: 10.1007/s12571-015-0469-2. 2) Mahuku, G., Lockhart, B.E., Wanjala, B., Jones, M,W., Kimunye, J.N., Stewart, L.R., Cassone, B.J., Subramanian, S., Nyasani, J., Kusia, E., Kumar, L., Niblett, C.L., Kiggundu, A., Asea, G., Pappu, H., Wangai, A., Prasanna, B.M., and Redinbaugh, M. 2015. Maize lethal necrosis (MLN), an emerging threat to maize- based food security in sub-Saharan Africa. Phytopathology 105:956-965. 3) Nair, S.K., Babu, R., Magorokosho, C., Mahuku, G., Semagn, K., Beyene, Y., Das, B., Makumbi, D., Kumar, P.L., Olsen, M., and Prasanna, M.B. 2015. Fine mapping of Msv1, a major QTL for resistance to Maize Streak Virus leads to development of production markers for breeding pipelines. Theor Appl Genet (2015) 128:1839–1854. DOI 10.1007/s00122-015-2551-8 4) Ding, J., Ali, F., Chen, G., Li, H., Mahuku, G., Yang, N., Narro, L., Magorokosho, C., Makumbi, D., and Yan, J. 2015. Genome-wide association mapping reveals novel sources of resistance to northern corn leaf blight in maize. BMC Plant Biology 15:206 (DOI 10.1186/s12870-015-0589-z) 5) Manje Gowda, M., Das, B., Makumbi, D., Babu, R., Semagn, K., Mahuku, G., Olsen, M.S., Jumbo M.B., Beyene, Y., and Prasanna, B,M, 2015. Genome‑wide association and genomic prediction of resistance to maize lethal necrosis disease in tropical maize germplasm. Theor Appl Genet DOI 10.1007/s00122-015- 2559-0 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Currently participating in a B&MGF funded project on “Improvement of banana for smallholder farmers in the Great Lakes Region of Africa” developing rapid disease screening protocols and mapping distribution in Uganda and Tanzania. • Leading a project to develop a bio-control product (Aflasafe) for managing aflatoxins in maize and groundnuts in Tanzania. The project is funded by USAID (US1.8 million) for three years (2016-2018), and involves over 30 partners from public and private institution. • Lead Scientist in developing “Managing maize lethal necrosis (MLN) in eastern Africa through accelerated development and delivery of resistant maize germplasm and seed systems support” and funded by B&MGF& Syngenta Foundation for US2.5 million (June, 2013 –December, 2017). Oversaw the establishment and operationalizing of a 20 ha facility. Interacted with both public and private sectors, including donors, seed companies) e.g. Monsato, Pionner, Seedo, etc). The facility employed 30 regular staff and over 40 casual workers. • Lead Scientist in developing the project “A Doubled Haploid Facility for Strengthening Maize Breeding Programs in Africa” that was funded for US5.987 million by B&MGF. This resulted in the development of the first DH facility for public use in Africa (May 2012 –May 2017). Role in RTB: Support Cluster Leader BA3.3: Banana fungal & bacterial diseases (Foc/BXW) of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops. 111 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Bonaventure Omondi AMAN ODUOR Current position and affiliation: Associate Scientist, Epidemiologist, Bioversity International, Burundi Profile: Bioversity International: Epidemiologist – Control and recovery from Banana Bunchy Top Disease in Eastern and Southern Africa. Work focus: Seed systems: Delivery of safe planting material, and Disease management Expertise: Entomology, Epidemiology, Molecular Biology, Agricultural Extension. Employment: • 2014 – date: Associate Scientist, Bioversity International, Burundi • 2014: Researcher, Agricultural research Council, Pretoria, South Africa (Molecular Systematics) • 2008-2009: Lecturer, Masinde Muliro University: Ecology and Conservation • 2004 -2005: Training Coordinator, Dudutech Kenya Ltd, Kenya. Education: 2009: PhD Environmental Sciences, (Entomology), North-West University, South Africa 2003: Master of Philosophy, Entomology, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Niyongere, C., Omondi A.B, Blomme G (2016) The Banana Bunchy Top Disease, In; Virus diseases of tropical and subtropical crops In: P. Tennant, G. Fermin (Ed), 12/2015: CAB International, Wallingford, United Kingdom. http://www.cabi.org/bookshop/book/9781780644264 2) Latorre-Estivalis JM, Omondi BA, Desouza O, Oliveira IR, Ignell R and Lorenzo MG(2015) Molecular basis of olfactory plasticity in Rhodnius prolixus, a Chagas disease vector. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 3:74. doi:10.3389/fevo.2015.00074 3) Omondi, AB, Majeed S, Ignell, R. (2015) Functional development of carbon dioxide detection in the maxillary palp of Anopheles gambiae Journal of Experimental Biology, 218:15: DOI: 10.1242/jeb.116798 4) McBride CS, Baier F, Omondi AB, Sarabeth A, Lutomiah, J, Sang, R. Ignell, R, Voshall L, (2014)Evolution of mosquito preference for humans linked to an odorant receptor, Nature, 515(7526): 222–227. DOI:10.1038/nature13964. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: 2014 – Date: Coordinating Learning Alliance for Recovery from BBTD in Malawi, Burundi and DR Congo, with collaboration in Cameroon, Benin, Gabon, and Nigeria. 2016: Coordinating Epidemiological Studies in the, BMGF Grant to Queensland University, on BBTV Management in West Africa. Role in RTB: Support Cluster Leader BA3.4: Banana viral diseases/BBTV of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops. Epidemiologist: Seed Degeneration and Seed Systems Project in RTB crops (part of a network of partners towards the delivery of clean planting material. 112 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Lava KUMAR Current position and affiliation: Head, Germplasm Health Unit/Virologist; International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), PMB 5320, Ibadan, Nigeria Profile: Virology; molecular biology; epidemiology; diagnostics; host resistance; IDM; mycotoxins; germplasm indexing; production of virus-free planting material; facilitation of international exchange of germplasm and seed health management; knowledge and technology dissemination; R&D coordination and program management. Employment: 01/08/10 to present: Head, Germplasm Health Unit / Virologist: IITA, Nigeria 01/08/07 to 31/07/10: Virologist (West & Central Africa): IITA, Nigeria 01/01/05 to 30/05/07: Scientist – Virology: ICRISAT, India 31/12/04 to 01/09/99: Special Project Scientist (Virology): ICRISAT, India Education: PhD1*, Virology Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati 517 502, AP, India 2000 MSc2 Virology Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati 517 502, AP, India 1995 1DFID (UK) fellowship; Research conducted at ICRISAT (India) and Scottish Crop Research Institute (SCRI), UK; Adjudged as best thesis in Plant Pathology by ICAR (2001); 2University first rank in MSc Virology Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1. Kumar, P.L., Selvarajan, R., Iskra-Caruana, M-L., Chabannes, M. and Hanna, R. 2015. Biology, etiology and control of virus diseases of banana and plantain. Advances in Virus Research 91: 229-269. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/bs.aivir.2014.10.006] Kamowa-Mbewe, W., Kumar, P.L., Changadeya, W., Ntawuruhunga, P. and Legg, J.P. 2015. Diversity, distribution and effects on cassava cultivars of cassava brown streak viruses in Malawi. Journal of Phytopathology 163(6): 433-443. [doi: 10.1111/jph.12339] 2. Silva, G., Bömer, M., Nkere, C., Kumar, P.L. and Seal, S.E. 2015. Rapid and specific detection of Yam mosaic virus by reverse-transcription recombinase polymerase amplification. Journal of Virological Methods 222: 138-144. Doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2015.06.011] 3. Patil, B.L. and Kumar, P.L. 2015. Pigeonpea sterility mosaic virus: a legume-infecting Emaravirus from South Asia. Molecular Plant Pathology 16(8): 775-786. [Doi. No. 10.1111/mpp.12238] 4. Kumar, P.L., Hanna, R., Alabi, O.J., Soko, M.M., Oben, T.T., Vangu, G.H.P., and Naidu, R.A. 2011. Banana bunchy top virus in sub-Saharan Africa: investigations on virus distribution and diversity. Virus Research 159: 171-182. 5. Gerald Otti, G, Bouvaine, S., Kimata, B., Mkamillo, G., Kumar, P.L., Tomlins, K., Maruthi, M.N. 2016. High throughput multiplex real time PCR assay method for the simultaneous quantification of DNA and RNA viruses infecting cassava plants. Applied of Applied Microbiology (accepted). 6. Seal, S., Turaki, A., Muller, E., Kumar, P.L., Kenyon, L., Filloux, D., Galzi, S., Lopez-Montes, A. and Iskra-Caruana, M-L. 2014. The prevalence of badnaviruses in West African yams (Dioscorea cayenensis-rotundata) and evidence of endogenous para retrovirus sequences in their genomes. Virus Research 186: 144-154. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: (i) Initiated BBTV Alliance since 2009, galvanized multidiscplinary stakeholders in BBTD affected countries in SSA leading to the formation of ‘ALLIANCE approach for BBTD control in Africa– www.bbtvalliance.org; (ii) Led, disease component of GLCI, funded by BMGF, which led to the mapping of CBSD spread in East Africa and also development of diagnostic capacity; (iii) Led, plant health component of seed yam of YIIFSWA project funded by BMGF, which contributed to establishment of clean planting materials of popular landraces, development of QMP and certification system, capacity development in yam virus diagnostics and seed health management; Advisory member and observe of the Inter-African Phytosanitary Council; also involved in controlling important transboundary diseases such as maize lethal necrosis, cassava brown streak and other diseases. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader BA3.4: Banana viral diseases/BBTV of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops; IITA leader for the RTB complementary projects on BBTV Alliance; Seed Degeneration; and Seed Framework. 113 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Marie-Line ISKRA-CARUANA Current position and affiliation: 2B2E Research Team Leader, Tropical Plant Virologist, CIRAD Profile • Interactions plant-pathogen: expression, evolution and risk assessment of endogenous pararetrovirus sequences (EPRV): Banana streak virus (BSV) responsible of banana streak disease as biological model to study EPRV. • Etiology, diversity and epidemiology of Mediterranean and Tropical viral diseases (viroids, cucumovirus, potyvirus, potexvirus, babuvirus, closterovirus, begomovirus and badnavirus in vegetables, citrus, passion fruits, banana). • Viral risk assessment in epidemic context for tropical crops (ie Banana Bunchy top control in smallholder farms system in Africa, risk assessment of banana streak infection of plantain in intensive crop system as well as smallholder farms system fin Africa and Latin America). Experience: 2011–current: Research Team Leader and member of the direction board - UMR BGPI – CIRAD 2006 - 2010 Deputy director of Research Unit UMR BGPI and Research Team leader - CIRAD 2001 - 2006 Research Team leader: ”Bioversity of endo and exogenous badnaviruses” UMR BGPI – CIRAD. 1998 - 2001 Scientific representative in plant protection (MIDEC) for the Scientific Director of CIRAD Education 2015: HDR (Accreditation to supervise research) ED SIBAGHE/GAIA, Montpellier France 1989: PhD, Virology, University BORDEAUX II, France Publications 1) Duroy P.-O, Perrier X., Laboureau N., Jacquemoud-Collet J.-P., Iskra-Caruana M.-L. 2016 How endogenous plant pararetroviruses shed light on Musa evolution accepted in Annals of Botany 2) Lava Kumar P., Selvarajan R., Iskra Caruana M.L., Chabannes M., Hanna R. 2015. Biology, etiology, and control of virus diseases of banana and plantain. In: by Gad Loebenstein and Nikolaos I. Katis. Control of Plant Virus Diseases Vegetatively-Propagated Crops. New-York : Academic Press, p. 229-269. 3) Rajeswaran R., Seguin J., Chabannes M., Duroy P.-O., Laboureau L., Farinelli L., Iskra-Caruana M.-L., Pooggin M.M. 2014 Evasion of siRNA-directed antiviral silencing in Musa acuminata persistently infected with six distinct banana streak pararetroviruses. Journal of Virology 88 (19) : 11516-11528 4) Iskra-Caruana M.-L., Duroy P.-O., Chabannes M., Muller E. 2014 Different partners involved in a common story. Infection, Genetics and Evolution, 21:83-89 5) Iskra-Caruana M.-L., Chabannes M., Duroy P.-O., Muller E. 2014 A possible scenario for the evolution of Banana streak virus in banana. Virus Research 186:155-162, 6) Umber M., Filloux D., Muller E., Laboureau N., Galzi S., Roumagnac P., Iskra-Caruana M.-L., Pavis C., Teycheney P.-Y., Seal S. 2014 The genome of African yam (Discorea cayenensis-rotundata complex) hosts endogenous sequences from four distinct badnavirus species. Molecular Plant Pathology 15(8): 790–801 7) Chabannes M., Baurens F.-C., Duroy P.-O., Sidibe-Bocs S., Vernerey M.-S., Rodier-Goud M., Barbe V., Gayral P., Iskra-Caruana M.-L. 2013. Three infectious viral species laying in wait in the banana genome. Journal of Virology, 87 (15): 8624-8637 Other Evidence of Leadership • 2013-2017: CGIAR Project-CRP Root, tubercules and banana «BBTD containment and recovery: Building capacity and piloting field recovery approaches through a learning alliance». Coordinator of Democratic Republic (Congo Brazza) partner – CIRAD 250 KEuros /year • 2002-2006: European project 5th PCRDT INCO Dev BETOCARIB « Begomovirus disease management for suitable production of tomato in the Caribbean» ICA4-2001-10002 Scientific Coordinator – 800 KEuros • 2002-2006: European project 5th PCRDT Research - PARADIGM « Pararetrovirus: diseases, integration and genomes» QLK3-CCT-2002-02098 – Coordinator – 1,78 MEuros Role in RTB: Support Cluster Leader BA3.4: Banana viral diseases/BBTV of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops. 114 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name Kris A.G. Wyckhuys Current position and affiliation Cassava Entomologist; International Center for Tropical Agriculture, CIAT Asia, Hanoi, Vietnam (k.wyckhuys@cgiar.org) Profile Insect biological control, arthropod food webs, agro-ecology, IPM Employment • 2014-present: Guest Professor – Sustainable Pest Management, Institute of Plant Protection, CAAS, Beijing, China • 2010-present: Entomologist, International Center for Tropical Agriculture, CIAT, Cali, Colombia • 2007-2010: Research Coordinator, Horticulture Research Center CIAA, Universidad Jorge Tadeo Lozano, Bogota, Colombia • 2005-2007: Postdoctoral Fellow at University of Minnesota, USA Education • 1998: B.A. in BioScience Engineering, University of Ghent • 2000: MSc in BioScience Engineering, Crop Protection, University of Ghent • 2005: PhD in Entomology, Purdue University Peer-reviewed scientific publications (total: 53) 1) Graziosi, I., Minato, N., Alvarez, E., Ngo Tien, D., Xuan Trinh, H., Aye, T.M., Pardo, J.M., Wongtiem, P., Wyckhuys, K.A.G. 2016. Emerging pests and diseases of Southeast Asian cassava: a comprehensive evaluation of geographic priorities, management options and research needs. Pest Management Science, in press. 2) Pan, H.S., Lu, Y.H., Xui, C.L., Geng, H.H., Cai, X.M., Sun, X.L., Zhang, Y.J., Williams, L. Wyckhuys, K.A.G., Wu, K.M. 2015. Volatile fragrances associated with flowers mediate host plant alternation of a polyphagous mirid bug. Scientific Reports 5, 14805. 3) Lundgren, J.G., Becerra, L.A., Parsa, S., Wyckhuys, K.A.G. 2014. Molecular determination of the predator community of a cassava whitefly in Colombia: pest-specific primer development and field validation. Journal of Pest Science 87, 125-131. 4) Wyckhuys, K.A.G., Lu, Y.H., Morales, H., Vazquez, L.L., Legaspi, J.C., Eliopoulos, P.A., Hernandez, L.M. 2013. Current status and potential of conservation biological control for agriculture in the developing world. Biological Control 65, 152-167. 5) Lu, Y.H., Wu, K.M., Jiang, Y.Y., Xia, B., Li, P., Feng, H.Q., Wyckhuys, K.A.G., Guo, Y.Y. 2010. Mirid Bug Outbreaks in Multiple Crops Correlated with Wide-scale Adoption of Bt Cotton in China. Science 328, 1151- 1154. 6) Wyckhuys, K.A.G., Koch, R.L., Kula, R. and Heimpel, G.E. 2009. Potential exposure of a classical biological control agent of the soybean aphid, Aphis glycines, on non-target aphids in North America. Biological Invasions 11, 857-871. 7) Wyckhuys, K.A.G. and O’Neil, R.J. 2007. Agro-ecological knowledge and its relationship to farmers’ pest management decision making in rural Honduras. Agriculture and Human Values, 24, 307-321. Other evidence of leadership, large-program management and delivery Coordinator of the CIAT-led Asia Cassava IPM network, an alliance of approx. 15 different institutions covering 8 different countries in Southeast Asia. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CA3.5: Cassava biotic stressors in the Americas and Asia of Flagship Project 3: Resilient Crops. 115 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Morag FERGUSON Position: Crop Germplasm Scientist, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Nairobi, Kenya Profile: Germplasm scientist - Main focus of research: Molecular characterization of cassava germplasm; QTL identi- fication particularly for virus resistance for application in genomics breeding approaches Professional experiences • 2002-present: Scientist, IITA, Kenya • 1999-2002: Special Project Scientist, ICRISAT, India • 1997-1999: Consultant, ICARDA, United Arab Emirates • 1993-1996: Research Associate, ICARDA, Syria Education • 1997: PhD in Crop Genetics, University of Birmingham, UK • 1991: MSc in Conservation and Utilization of Plant Genetic Diversity, University of Birmingham, UK Recent publications in international journals 1) International Cassava Genetic Map Consortium (ICGMC) (2015) High-Resolution Linkage Map and 2) Chromosome-Scale Genome Assembly for Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) from 10 Populations. G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics: 5:133-144. 3) Legg JP, P. Lava Kumar, T. Makeshkumar, M. Ferguson, E. Kanju, P. Ntawuruhunga and W. Cuellar (2015). Cassava Virus Diseases: Biology, Epidemiology and Management. Advances in Virus Research 91:85-142 4) Rabbi, I.Y., Hamblin, M., Gedil, M., Kulakow, P., Ferguson, M., Ikpan, A., Ly, D., Jannink, J. (2014) Genetic mapping using genotyping-by-sequencing in the clonally propagated cassava. Crop Science 54:1-13 5) Kaweesi T, R Kawuki, V Kyaligonza, Y Baguma, G Tusiime and M Ferguson (2014). Field Evaluation of Selected Cas- sava Genotypes for Cassava Brown Streak Disease based on Symptom Expression and Virus Load. Virology Journal 11:1-14 6) Kawuki RS, L Herselman, MT Labuschagne, I Nzuki, I Ralimanana, M Bidiaka, MC Kanyange, G Gashaka, E Masumba, G Mkamilo, J Gethi, B Wanjala, A Zacarias, F Madabula and ME Ferguson (2013). Genetic Diversity of Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) Landraces and Cultivars from Southern, Eastern and Central Africa. Plant Genetic Re- sources 11:170- 181 7) Rabbi IY, HP Kulembeka, E Masumba, PR Marri, M Ferguson (2012) An EST-derived SNP and SSR genetic linkage map of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz).Theoretical and Applied Genetics 125:329-342 8) Ferguson, ME, S.J. Hearne, T.J. Close, S. Wanamaker, W.A. Moskal, C.D. Town, J. de Young, P.R. Marri, I.Y. Rabbi, E.P. de Villiers (2012). Identification, validation and high-throughput genotyping of transcribed gene SNPs in cassa- va. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 124:685-695 Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery • 2009-2016: Project manager and scientist; ‘Biotechnology Applications to Combat Cassava Brown Streak Disease’; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, $4.2m • 2005-2008: Project manager and scientist; ‘Tapping Crop Biodiversity for the Resource Poor in Southern and East- ern Africa’ Rockefeller/BECA/GCP, $950,000 • 2003-2006: Project manager and scientist; ‘Molecular marker-assisted and farmer participatory improvement of cassava germplasm for farmer/market-preferred traits in Tanzania’. Rockefeller Foundation, $518,000. • 2003-2004: Project manager and scientist; Biotechnology component of a project entitled ‘Improving Rural Liveli- hoods in Southern Africa’. USAID-RCSA, Biotechnology Component USD 1m. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CA3.6: Cassava biological threats, Africa in Flagship Project 3: Resilient crops; 116 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name : Boris SZUREK Current position and affiliation : Research scientist at IRD (IPME), plant pathologist. Email: boris.szurek@ird.fr Profile: Plant-pathogen molecular interactions, Rice and Cassava bacterial diseases caused by Xanthomonas spp., host susceptibility determinants, plant resistance genes, Xanthomonas pathogenicity factors. Employment: • 2004-present: Researcher at IRD, France. • 2002-2004: Post-doc researcher at INRA, France. Education: • 2015: HDR (Accreditation to supervise research), U. Montpellier, France. • 2001: PhD in phytopathology, INAP-PG / Univ. Paris VI and XI, France. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Evaluation of elite rice varieties unmasks new sources of broad-spectrum bacterial blight and leaf streak resistance for Africa. Wonni I, Hutin M, Ouedrago L, Somda I, Verdier V, Szurek B. 2016 RICE, In press. 2) Hutin M, Sabot F, Ghesquière A, Koebnik R, Szurek B. 2015 A knowledge-based molecular screen uncovers a broad spectrum OsSWEET14 resistance allele to bacterial blight from wild rice. Plant J. 84(4):694-703. 3) Hutin M, Pérez-Quintero AL, Lopez C, Szurek B. 2015 MorTAL Kombat: the story of defense against TAL effectors through loss-of-susceptibility. Front Plant Sci. Jul 14;6:535. 4) Munoz A, Pérez A, Gomez F, Gil J, Michelmore A, Bernal A, Szurek B, Lopez C. 2014 RNAseq analysis of cassava reveals similar plant responses upon infection with pathogenic and non-pathogenic strains of Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. manihotis. Plant Cell Rep. 2014, 11:1901-12. 5) Richter A, Streubel J, Blücher C, Szurek B, Reschke M, Grau J, Boch J. 2014 A TAL effector repeat architecture for frameshift binding. Nat Commun. 5:3447. 6) Noël LD, Denancé N, Szurek B. 2013 Predicting promoters targeted by TAL effectors in plant genomes: from dream to reality. Front Plant Sci. 3;4:333. 7) Streubel J, Pesce C, Hutin M, Koebnik R, Boch J, Szurek B. 2013 Five phylogenetically close rice SWEET genes confer TAL effector-mediated susceptibility to Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae. New Phytol. 200(3):808-19. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • PI of research program PAIX “PAthogen-Informed sustainable resistance of cassava against Xanthomonas“ (2015 – 2018) funded by Agropolis Fondation. Main partners : Cirad, CNRS, CIAT, U. los Andes, UNAL, AGI, INERA. • Coordinator of a WP on rice bacterial diseases within New Frontier research project MENERGEP « Methodologies and new resources for genotyping and phenotyping of African rice species and their pathogens for developing strategic disease resistance breeding programs » (2012 – 2014) funded by CRP RICE (GRiSP). Main partners : AfricaRice, Cirad, IITA. • Co-PI of research project CROpTAL « TALome-based engineering of durable pathogen resistance in crops » (2014 – 2018) funded by the French National Agency (ANR). Role in RTB: Support Cluster Leader CA3.5: Cassava biological constraints, Asia/Americas; involvement on activities related to CBB in CA3.6: Cassava biological threats, Africa of Flagship Program 3: Resilient Crops. 117 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Jean-Michel LETT Position: Research scientist in Molecular Plant Virology, CIRAD Profile: Molecular plant virologist and epidemiologist - Main focus of research: Diversity, Evolution and Emergence of plant-infecting viruses transmitted by insect vectors in Africa. Professional experiences Since 2001 Research scientist in Plant Virology, CIRAD - UMR PVBMT, Pôle de Protection des Plantes, Ile de La Réunion, France Selected projects funded and managed • 2008-2010: Indigenous begomovirus diversity in the south-west Indian Ocean islands (BEGOMODIV, N°044D10/MOM, 15 000 euros). • 2009-2011: Emergence of geminiviruses in the south-west Indian Ocean islands (EMERGE, N°/PRAO/AIRD/CRVOI/08/03, 200 000 euros). • 2013-2014: Emergence of begomoviruses in Africa (EMEB, PEERS/AIRD, 50 000 euros). • 2013-2015: Plant protection and Sustainable agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa (ProVeg, PARRAF/AIRD, 156 527 euros). Education • 2014: Accreditation to supervise research (HDR) in Plant Virology, University of La Réunion, St-Pierre, France • 2000: PhD in Plant Virology, Paris Institute of Technology for Life, Food and Environmental Sciences (AgroParis- Tech), Paris, France Selected recent publications: Zinga I, Chiroleu F., Legg J., Lefeuvre P., Kosh Komba E., Semballa S., Yandia S.P., Mandakombo N., Reynaud, B. and J.- M. Lett (2013). Epidemiological assessment of cassava mosaic disease in Central African Republic reveals the im- portance of viral mixed infection and poor health of plant cuttings. Crop Protection, 44, 6-12. [IF: 1,40] Harimalala M., De Bruyn A., Hoareau M., Ranomenjanahary S., Andrianjaka A., Reynaud B. Lefeuvre P., and J.-M. Lett (2013). Molecular characterization of a new alphasatellite associated with a cassava mosaic geminivirus in Mada- gascar. Archives of Virology, 158, 1829-1832. [IF: 2,11] Muhire B., Golden M., Murrell B., Lefeuvre P., Lett J.-M., Gray A., Poon A., Ngandu N., Semegni Y., Tanov E., Monjane A., Harkins G., Varsani A., Shepherd D., Martin D.P. (2014). Evidence of Pervasive Biologically Functional Secondary Structures within the Genomes of Eukaryotic ssDNA Viruses. Journal of Virology, 88, 1972-1989. [IF : 5,40] Péréfarres F., Thébaud G., Lefeuvre P., Chiroleu F., Rimbaud L., Hoareau, M., Reynaud, B. and J.-M. Lett (2014). Fre- quency-dependent assistance as a way out of competitive exclusion between two strains of an emerging virus. Pro- ceedings of the Royal Society B, 281, 20133374. [IF : 5,60] Harimalala M., Chiroleu F., Giraud-Carrier C., Hoareau M., Ranomenjanahary S., Andrianjaka A., Reynaud B. Lefeuvre P., and J.-M. Lett (2014). Molecular epidemiology of cassava mosaic disease in Madagascar. Plant Pathology, 64, 501– 507. [IF: 2,13] Roux-Cuvelier M., Teyssedre D., Chesneau T., Jeffray C., Massé D., Jade K., Abdoul-Karime A.L., Hostachy B., Reynaud B., Legg J.P. and J.-M. Lett (2015). First report of cassava brown streak disease and associated Ugandan cassava brown streak virus in Mayotte Island. New Disease Reports 30, 28. [IF: NA] Becker N., Rimbaud L., Chiroleu F., Reynaud B., Thébaud G. and J.-M. Lett (2015). Rapid accumulation and low degrada- tion: key parameters of Tomato yellow leaf curl virus persistence in its insect vector Bemisia tabaci. Scientific Re- ports, 5, 17696; doi:10.1038/srep17696. [IF: 5,58] Role in RTB: Support Cluster Leader CA3.6: Cassava biological threats, Africa of Flagship Project 3: Resilient crops 118 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 FP4: Nutritious food & added value 119 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Simon HECK Current position and affiliation: Program Leader, Strategic Program on Resilient, Nutritious Sweetpotato, International Potato Center (CIP) Profile: (Main experience, area(s) of expertise, attributes of relevance): Food and nutrition security, postharvest, value chain, program manager Employment: • 2014-present: Program Leader, Strategic Program on Resilient, Nutritious Sweetpotato, International Potato Center (CIP), Uganda • 2013-present: Project Leader, Scaling-up Sweetpotato through Agriculture and Nutrition (SUSTAIN), International Potato Center (CIP), Uganda • 2012-2013. Deputy Program Manager, Sweetpotato Program in Africa, International Potato Center (CIP), Uganda • 2011 – 2014: Chair, Agro-Enterprise Learning Alliance for Eastern and Southern Africa Education: • 1997: Ph.D. in Social Anthropology, Boston University, USA • 1988: M.A. in Anthropology, Geography, Political Science, Johannes Gutenberg Universität, Mainz, Germany Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Lagekvist, C.-J., J. Okello, P. Muoki, and S. Heck. 2016. Nutrition promotion messages: The effect of information on consumer sensory expectations, experiences and emotions of vitamin A- biofortified sweet potato. Food Quality and Preference (submitted). 2) Heck, S. and R. Ackatia-Armah. 2015. Scaling-up integrated agriculture-nutrition-market approaches to promote biofortified crops: the case of orange fleshed sweetpotato in four African countries. Paper presented at 2nd International Conference on Global Food Security, Ithaca, NY, USA, 11-14 October 2015. 3) Longley C, Thilsted SH, Beveridge M, Cole S, Nyirenda DB, Heck S and Hother A-L (2014). The Role of Fish in the First 1,000 Days in Zambia. In Harris, Jody; Haddad, Lawrence and Grütz, Silke Seco (2014) Turning Rapid Growth into Meaningful Growth: Sustaining the Commitment to Nutrition in Zambia, Brighton: IDS. Pp. 27-35. 4) Heck, S., C. Béné, and R.R. Reyes-Gaskin. 2007. Investing in African fisheries: Building links to the millennium development goals. Fish and Fisheries 8:211-226. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Program Leader, Strategic Program on Resilient, Nutritious Sweetpotato: 30 research projects in 15 countries in Africa and Asia; $22m+ annual budget • Project Leader, Scaling-up Sweetpotato through Agriculture and Nutrition: 5-year $18m project to reach 1.2m households with OFSP; research on scalability Role in RTB: Leader of Flagship 4: Nutritious food & added value 120 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Bussie MAZIYA-DIXON Current position and affiliation: Senior Scientist; International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) Profile: Over 15 years of experience working in sub Saharan Africa with the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), a member of the Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers as a Food Scientist/Technologist responsible for food and nutrition research. I have extensive knowledge of research on nutritional quality assessment of both raw and processed products; product development, improving the nutritional quality of traditional food products through food to food fortification, and nutritional assessment and food consumption surveys. Employment: • 2014-present: Senior Scientist, IITA, Nigeria • 2012-present: CRP Leader/Coordinator, IITA, Nigeria • 2001-present: Crop Utilization Specialist (Food Scientist), IITA, Nigeria • 1999-2000: Visiting Scientist, IITA, Nigeria, Education: • 1992: PhD in Food Science, Kansas State University, USA • 1989: MSc in Food Science, Kansas State University, USA Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) De Moura, F. F., Moursi, M., Lubowa, A., Ha, B., Boy, E., Oguntona, B. E., Sanusi, R., Maziya-Dixon. B. 2015. Cassava intake and vitamin A status among women and preschool children in Akwa-Ibom, Nigeria. PLoS ONE. 10(6) (e0129436):1 -14. 2) Wasiu Awoyale, Bussie Maziya-Dixon, Lateef Oladimeji Sanni and Taofi k Akinyemi Shittu. 2015 Effect of water yam (Dioscorea alata) flour fortified with distiller ’ s spent grain on nutritional, chemical, and functional properties. Food Science and Nutrition, doi: 10.1002/fsn3.254. 3) Busie B. Maziya-Dixon and Alfred G. O. Dixon. 2015. Carotenoids content of yellow-fleshed cassava genotypes grown in four agroecological zones in Nigeria and their Retinol Activity Equivalents (RAE). Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment Vol.13 (2): 63 - 69. 4) Abdoulaye, T., Abass, A., Maziya-Dixon, B., Tarawali, G., Okechukwu, R., Rusike, J., Alene, A., Manyong, V., Ayedun, B. 2014. Awareness and adoption of improved cassava varieties and processing technologies in Nigeria. J. Development and Agricultural Economics 6(2):67-75 5) Njukwe, E., Onadipe, O. O., Amadou Thierno, D., Hanna, R., Kirscht, H., Maziya-Dixon, B., Araki, S., Mbairanodji, A., Ngue-Bissa, T. 2014. Cassava processing among small-holder farmers in Cameroon: opportunities and challenges. Int. Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research. 2(4):113-124 6) Wireko-Manu, F.D., Ellis, W., Oduro, I., Asiedu, R., Maziya-Dixon, B. 2013. Prediction of the suitability of water yam (Dioscorea alata) for amala product using pasting and sensory characteristics. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation. pp: 1-7. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Over the years, I have gained experience in science leadership and management. I have coordinated and managed research projects that involve a variety of research and development partners, colleagues from national and international institutions with specialization in a range of disciplines, such as agriculture, public health, nutrition, social science (economics including gender), and biometrics. Hence, I have gathered experience in administrative and management skills together with project planning and design, budgeting, implementation, and monitoring. In addition, I have led or participated in interdisciplinary teams in proposal writing. I lead the CRP on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health and the Result Based Management (RBM) Pilot on Cassava Processing. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CC4.1: Postharvest innovation and nutrition improvement of Flagship Project 4: Nutritious food and added value. 121 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Thierry TRAN Current position and affiliation: Senior Researcher, CIRAD - UMR Qualisud Profile: Efficiency of RTB processing equipment at large scale and small scale. Expertise areas: Quality of RTB- based products: physico-chemical and functional properties; Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and environmental impacts; Multi-objective optimization. Recent activities include technical and economic surveys of cassava processing factories in six countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America; and numerical simulations of flash drying. Employment: • 2009 – present: Senior researcher, Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD), Montpellier, France. Based in Bangkok (Thailand) since 2011. • 2005 – 2009: Researcher, Cassava and Starch Technology Research Unit (CSTRU), BIOTEC - Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand. • 2003 – 2005: Postdoctoral fellow, Food Sciences Division, University of Nottingham, UK. Education: • 2003: PhD Food Sciences and Technology, University of Nottingham, UK and Kellogg, UK/USA • 1999: MSc Physics & Chemistry, Ecole Supérieure de Physique et Chimie Industrielles (ESPCI), France Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Hansupalak N., Piromkraipak P., Tamthirat P., Manitsorasak A., Sriroth K., Tran T. (2015). Biogas reduces the carbon footprint of cassava starch: A comparative assessment with fuel oil. Journal of Cleaner Production. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.138. I.F. 3.844 2) Tran T., Da G., Moreno-Santander M.A., Velez-Hernandez G.A., Giraldo-Toro A., Piyachomkwan K., Sriroth K., Dufour D. (2015). A comparison of energy use, water use and carbon footprint of cassava starch production in Thailand, Vietnam and Colombia. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 100, 31-40. I.F. 3.026 3) Da G., Dufour D., Giraldo A., Moreno M., Tran T., Velez G., Sanchez T., Le Thanh M., Marouzé C., Maréchal P.A. (2013). Cottage level cassava starch processing systems in Colombia and Vietnam. Food and Bioprocess Technology 6(8), 2213-2222. I.F. 3.703 4) Maldonado P., Grosmaire L., Dufour D., Giraldo Toro A., Sanchez T., Calle F., Moreno A.M., Ceballos H., Delarbre J.L., Tran T. (2013). Combined effect of fermentation, sun-drying and genotype on breadmaking ability of sour cassava starch. Carbohydrate Polymers 98, 1137-1146. I.F. 3.942 5) Bessou C., Basset-Mens C., Tran T., Benoist A. (2012). LCA applied to perennial cropping systems: a review focused on the farm stage. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(2), 340-361. I.F. 2.362 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Leader of the CS1 work package “Optimization of selected small and medium processing systems for cassava” in the 2013-2016 RTB complementary funding project: Driving livelihood improvements through demand-oriented interventions for competitive production and processing of Roots Tubers and Bananas (RTBs), involving CIAT, IITA and CIRAD in Vietnam, Thailand, Tanzania, Nigeria, Colombia, Paraguay; and national partners (Univalle, Kasetsart University, KMUTT). • Coordinator of the work package on processing and product quality in the EuropeAid PDMACIM project: Sustainable cassava production in Central Africa and market integration. • Organizer of a networking workshop “Drying optimization for the sustainable development of cassava industry” with a grant from the SEA-EU-NET project, in partnership with the 8th Starch Update conference, Bangkok (Thailand) in December 2015 (200 participants). Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CA4.2: Cassava processing of Flagship Project 4: Nutritious food and added value. 122 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Elizabeth PARKES Current position and affiliation: Cassava breeder, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan, Nigeria Profile: HarvestPlus cassava breeder, developing provitamin A cassava. Support over five African countries to breed and mainstream provitamin A cassava in their breeding program. Support delivery and advocacy work on provitamin A cassava by providing foundation seeds and technical support to partners in Nigeria. Employment: • 2012 to present: HarvestPlus cassava breeder, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan, Nigeria. • 1992 – 2012: Research Scientist with CSIR Council for Scientific and Industrial Research Institutes • 2006-2012: Research Scientist, Cassava Breeder and officer-in-charge and head of CRI Pokuase Research Station of the CSIR-Crops Research Institute, Pokuase station, CSIR-CRI, Accra Office Ghana CSIR-CRI Kumasi • 1996 – 1997: Research Scientist, CSIR- Institute of Scientific and Technological Information INSTI, Accra • 1992 – 1996: Assistant Research Officer CSIR-CRI, Fumesua, Kumasi, Education: • 2011: PhD in Plant Breeding University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa • 2001: MPhil. in Crop Science University of Ghana, Legon Selected recent peer-reviewed publications 1) Parkes, E., Fregene, M., Dixon, A., Okogbenin, E., Boakye-Peprah, B. & Labuschagne, M. (2015) Developing Cassava Mosaic Disease resistant cassava varieties in Ghana using a marker assisted selection approach. IN Euphytica, 203. 549- 556. 2) Agyeman, A., Parkes, E. & Peprah, B. B. (2015) AMMI and GGE biplot analysis of root yield performance of cassava genotypes in the forest and coastal ecologies. IN International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research, 3. 222 - 232. 3) Rabbi, I. Y., Kulakow, P., Manu-Aduening, J. A. , Dankyi, A. A. , Asibuo, J. Y. , Parkes, E., Abdoulaye, T., Girma Tessema, G., Gedil, M., Ramu, P., Reyes, B. & Maredia, M. K. (2015) Tracking crop varieties using genotyping- by-sequencing markers: a case study using cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). IN BMC Genetics, 16. 1 - 11. 4) E. Y. Parkes, Y Rabbi, R.Okechukwu, E. Kanju, M. Ferguson, P. Ntawuruhunga, N. Mahungu, O.O. Aina, Agbona, A, P. Iluebbey, Ilona, A.G.O Dixon, P. A. Kulakow: Progress and current trends in cassava improvement in Sub-Saharan Africa by IITA and partners. Tropentag, Berlin, Germany August 2015 5) Parkes, E., Kulakow, P., Maziya-Dixon, B., Iluebbey, P., Dixon, A., Agbona, A., Ogungbesan, B., Aina, O., Alamu, O. E. & Ceballos, H. 2015. Breeding for enhanced proVitamin A levels in cassava roots in Nigeria. European Nutrition Conference (FENS), Berlin, Germany, 20 -23 2015 6) Parkes EY, Fregene M, Dixon A, Boakye-Peprah B, Labuschagne MT. 2013. Combining ability of cassava genotypes for cassava mosaic disease and cassava bacterial blight, yield and its related components in two ecological zones in Ghana. Euphytica. 194(1):13-24 7) Boakye-Peprah, B., Ofori, K., Asante, I., Parkes, E. (2013) Performance of nine cassava (Manihot esculanta Crantz) clones across three environments. IN Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science, 5. 48 - 53. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: HarvestPlus Project Leader, released four provitamin A cassava varieties. Supported delivery activities in Nigeria to over 500,000 households in Nigeria. IITA/GIZ project leader, two MPhil students trained provitamin A cassava and draft manual on protocols for measuring total carotenoids in preparation with partners from the University of Ghana and Potsdam Generation Challenge Programme project leader for Ghana with graduates trained a cassava as team in Ghana. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CA4.3: Biofortified cassava of Flagship Project 4: Nutritious food and added value. 123 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Robert S. ACKATIA-ARMAH Current position and affiliation: Regional Nutritionist – International Potato Center (CIP) Profile: Medical and field nutritionist in teaching, research and development. Currently exploring links between agriculture and nutrition in diversified farming systems in rural settings to explore innovative approaches of incorporating food-based approaches into national nutrition programs and food systems. Experience in translating field research into sustainable community-based nutrition programs for low income households and vulnerable populations in various countries. My goal is to improve program delivery, implementation, assessment and evaluation of community-based interventions that address malnutrition and improve livelihoods. Employment: • 2014-present: Regional Nutritionist- International Potato Center (CIP) Sub-Saharan Africa • 2013-2014: Consultant Nutritionist - National Community Nutrition Program Unit - Government of Madagascar/World Bank and Post-Doctoral Scholar-. University of California, Davis • 2011-2013: Associate Junior Specialist – Program in International and Community Nutrition- College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. University of California, Davis • 2009-2013: Research Nutritionist and Scientific Coordinator – Helen Keller International (HKI) Bamako, Mali and Dakar- Senegal Education: • 2013: PhD in Nutrition and Metabolism (MED). Boston University School of Medicine. Boston, MA. USA. • 2006: M. Phil in Nutrition. University of Ghana, Legon – Accra, Ghana Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Robert Ackatia-Armah, Christine M McDonald, Seydou Doumbia, Juergen G. Erhardt, Janet M Peerson, and Kenneth H Brown (2015). Effect of selected dietary supplements on micronutrient status during recovery from moderate acute malnutrition in young Malian children. Am J Clin Nutr 2015 101: 3 632- 645; doi:10.3945/ajcn.113.069807 2) Donna J. Chapman, Anne Merewood, Robert Ackatia-Armah, and Rafael Pérez-Escamilla (2008). Breastfeeding Status on US Birth Certificates: Where Do We Go From Here? Pediatrics, Dec 2008; 122: e1159 - e1163 3) Robert Ackatia-Armah, Christine M McDonald, Seydou Doumbia, Janet M Peerson, and Kenneth H Brown (2013). Rate of participation in bi-monthly, community-based screening for acute malnutrition in rural Mali, and factors associated with screening participation FASEB J April 9, 2013 27:620.3 4) Christine McDonald, Robert Ackatia-Armah, Roland Kupka, Christopher Duggan, and Kenneth H. Brown. Change in body composition of young Malian children with moderate acute malnutrition over a 12 week dietary intervention FASEB J March 17, 2011 25:592.25 [Meeting Abstract] 5) Anna Lartey, Robert Ackatia-Armah, and Grace Suzanne Marquis Contribution of Breast milk to the total energy and nutrient intakes of Ghanaian children 18–24 months. FASEB J. 2006 20:A613 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Support to large scale CIP led initiatives and grants for nutrition related programs as regional nutrition advisor (DFID and USAID funded multi country projects) • Academic Board member- eNutrition Academy (eNA) – Capacity building and mentorship • Program manager at Helen Keller International Community Based Management of Acute Malnutrition (CMAM) program in Mali. $1,000,000 Grant by UN agencies in collaboration with University of California, Davis • Consultant to Government of Madagascar on World Bank funded program to address malnutrition and stunting • Team Member for Nevin Scrimshaw International Nutrition Foundation (NSINF) capacity building initiative on developing research agendas, strategies for planning, managing, and communicating food and nutrition Role in RTB: Cluster Leader SW.4.4: Nutritious, Sweetpotato of Flagship Project 4: Nutritious and added value. 124 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 FP5: Improving livelihoods at scale 125 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Piet VAN ASTEN Current position and affiliation: Senior Scientist - Systems Agronomist - IITA Profile: Systems agronomist at IITA-Uganda working on sustainable intensification of perennial-based cropping systems (banana, cassava, cocoa, coffee) in Africa’s humid zones for the past 13 years. In his research, he has a strong focus on trans-disciplinary science ranging from the soil pit to household economics, linkages to input- output markets, drivers of technology adoption and policy engagement. He published over 50 publications in peer- reviewed journals and books and has successfully supervised over 30 MSc and PhD students. His main interests are the development of more productive, profitable, and resilient agricultural systems that enable improved livelihoods of smallholder farmers, including improved opportunities for youth and women. Employment: • 2003-present: Systems agronomist, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Uganda • 2011-2015: Climate Change focal point for CCAFS, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Uganda Education: • 1996: BSc, MSc in Agriculture and Natural Environment, Wageningen University • 2003: PhD in Soil Science – Agronomy, Wageningen University, Holland. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Frelat, R., Lopez-Ridaura, S., Giller, K.E., Herrero, M. Douxchamps, S., Andersson Djurfeldt, A., Erensteinb, O., Henderson, B., Kassie, M., Paul, B.K., Rigolotd, C., Ritzema, R., Rodriguez, D., van Asten, P.J.A., van Wijk, M.T., 2015. Drivers of household food availability in sub-Saharan Africa based on big data from small farms. PNAS www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10. 1073/pnas.1518384112. 2) Bongers L. Fleskens, G., G. Van de Ven, D. Mukasa, K. Giller, P. van Asten, 2015. Diversity in smallholder farms growing coffee and their use of recommended coffee management practices in Uganda. Experimental Agriculture 1-21. 3) Vanlauwe, B., D. Coyne, J. Gockowski, S. Hauser, J. Huising, C. Masso, G. Nziguheba, M. Schut, P. Van Asten, 2014. Sustainable intensification and the African smallholder farmer. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 8:15–22 4) Klapwijk, CJ, MT van Wijk, TS Rosenstock, PJA van Asten, PK Thornton, KE Giller, 2014. Analysis of trade-offs in agricultural systems: current status and way forward, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 6:110– 115. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Over the past 10 years Piet has been increasingly involved in managing and supporting research for development projects on a regional scale. He coordinated IITA’s climate change research as CCAFS focal point from 2011-2015. In his role as IITA-Uganda country representative, he has been able to help attract and manage R4D projects with a total value exceeding 18 million USD between 2013-2016. As a PI of large multi- scale and multi-partner projects (a.o. CIALCA, PASIC), he proven experience with linking research to development through participatory research, backstopping of out-scaling partners and policy engagement. Role in RTB: Leader of Flagship 5: Improving livelihoods at scale. 126 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Elisabetta GOTOR Current position and affiliation: Head, a.i. Development Impact Unit, Bioversity International Profile: Agricultural economist with more than ten years of professional experience in international research- for- development work in the area of economic analysis and evaluation of agricultural development problems and policies. Since January 2007, she has been working at Bioversity International first as Associate Scientist (2007- 2011) and then as a Scientist, leading and managing the Impact Assessment Unit (2011 to date), now Development Impact Unit. At Bioversity her research activities focus on measuring the impact of conserving agro- biodiversity on food security, poverty, nutrition and ecosystem services applying quantitative and qualitative economic analysis and econometric techniques. She has been conducting and leading field work in Bolivia, China, Ecuador, Kazakhstan, Kenya, India, Peru, The Philippines, Uzbekistan and Yemen. Employment: • 20011-present: Scientist, Head, a.i Development Impact Unit, Bioversity International Rome, Italy • 2007-2011: Associate Scientist, Impact Assessment Unit, Bioversity International Rome, Italy • 2005- 2006: Teaching and Research Assistant, University of Reading, Department of Agricultural and Food Economics, Reading-UK • 2003-2005: Consultant, Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO), Raw Material, Tropical and Horticultural Products Service, Rome-Italy Education: • 2008: PhD Agricultural and Food Economics University of Reading, Department of Agricultural and Food Economics, Reading - UK • 2004: MSc (International Trade University of Roma Tre, Department of Economics, Rome- Italy Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Bellon M. R., Gotor E., Caracciolo F. 2015. Assessing the effectiveness of projects supporting on-farm conservation of native crops: evidence from the High Andes of South America. World Development. doi:10.1016/j. worlddev.2015.01.014. http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0305750X15000157 2) Bellon M.R., Gotor E., Caracciolo F. 2015. Conserving landraces and improving livelihoods: how to assess the success of on-farm conservation projects? International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 13:2 (167- 182). doi: 10.1080/14735903.2014.986363. 3) Gotor E. Caracciolo , F., Blundo Canto, G.M., and Al Nusairi, M., 2013. Improving rural livelihoods through the conservation and use of underutilized species: evidence from a community research project in Yemen, International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, DOI:10.1080/14735903.2013.796173 4) Gotor E., Tsigas M.E., 2011. The impact of the EU sugar trade reform on poor households in developing countries: A general equilibrium analysis: Journal of Policy Modeling, 33:568-582. 5) Gotor E., Caracciolo F., Watts J., 2010.The Perceived Impact of the In-Trust Agreements on CGIAR Germplasm Availability: An Assessment of Bioversity International’s Institutional Activities. World Development 38 (10): 1486–1493 6) Gotor E., Caracciolo F., 2010. An empirical assessment of the effects of the 1994 In Trust Agreements on IRRI germplasm acquisition and distribution. International Journal of the Commons, 4(1):437–451 7) Dulloo M.E., Ebert A.W., Dussert S., Gotor E., Astorga C., Vasquez N., Rakotomalala J.J., Rabemiafara A., Eira M., Bellachew B., Omondi C., Engelmann F. Anthony F. Watts J. Qamar Z. and Snook L., 2009. Coffee field collections at risk: Can cryopreservation help to ensure their long term security? Crop Science 49:2123–2138 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • 2011 and 2013: lead and supervised two major external commissioned evaluations on Bioversity programs. Results were reported to the Institute’s Board of Trustee, CGIAR-Research Programmes’ directors, the Indipendent Evaluation Arrangment of the CGIAR and project donors. • 2014: co-authored two publications describing and applying an approach for assessing the effectiveness of projects aimed at creating incentives for smallholder farmers to continue maintaining crop diversity under evolution on their farms in relevant centers of genetic diversity. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CC5.1: Foresight, impact assessment and co-learning of Flagship 5: Improving Livelihoods at scale. 127 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Danny COYNE Current position and affiliation: Senior Scientist, IITA Profile: Twenty five years + experience in agricultural research and extension in tropical cropping systems across Africa and in UK agrochemical field trials co-ordination. In-depth knowledge of tropical crop systems through involvement in, and management of, crop protection extension and pest management projects within African National Programmes and at International Agricultural Research Centres. Extensive involvement in commodity based value chains, such as peri-urban vegetable systems, banana in East Africa and yam in West Africa. Project management and team leadership within a regional context has necessitated co-ordination of staff and activities over distance, across national programmes and in facilitating the integration of activities into national programmes. Experience in the development of project proposals, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of projects, training and financial accountability. Employment: • 2001 – present: Senior Scientist, IITA, Nigeria, Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya. • 2000 – 2001: Technical Advisor, GTZ, Malawi. • 1994 – 1998: Senior Scientist, NRI, UK, based at WARDA, Côte d'Ivoire. • 1993 – 1994: Associate Professional Officer, DfID, based at NARO, Uganda Education: • 1999, Ph.D. in Rice pest and disease management in West Africa, University of Reading, UK. • 1992, M.Sc. in Agricultural Research and Development, University of East Anglia, UK. Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Coyne D, Wasukira A, Dusabe J, Rotifa I, Dubois, T. 2010. Boiling water treatment: a simple, rapid and effective technique for producing healthy banana and plantain (Musa spp.) planting material. Crop Protection 29, 1478- 1482. 2) Vanlauwe, B., Coyne, D., Gockowski, J., Hauser, S., Huising, J., Masso, C., Nziguheba, G., Schut M., and Van Asten, P. 2014. Sustainable intensification and the African smallholder farmer. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 8, 15–22. 3) Swennen R, Blomme G, Van Asten P, Lepoint P, Karamura E, Njukwe E, Tinzaara W, Viljoen A, Karangwa P, Coyne D, and Lorenzen J. 2013. In: Mitigating the impact of biotic constraints to build resilient banana systems in Central and Eastern Africa. Earthscan Book; Pp 85-104.Dubois, T. and Coyne, D. 2011. Integrated Pest Management of Banana. Banana breeding: constraints and progress. CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, pp. 121-144. 4) Tenkouano A, Hauser S, Coyne D & Coulibaly O. 2006. Clean Planting Materials and Management Practices for Sustained Production of Banana and Plantain in Africa. Chronica Horticulturae 46(2), 14-18. 5) Dixon AGO, Bandyopadhyay R, Coyne D, Ferguson M, Ferris RSB, Hanna R, Hughes J, Ingelbrecht I, Legg J, Mahungu N, Manyong V, Mowbray D, Neuenschwander P, Whyte J, Hartmann P & Ortiz R. 2003. Cassava: From Poor Farmers' Crop to Pacesetter of African Rural Development. Chronica Hortica 43, 8-15. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CC5.2: Sustainable intensification and diversification for improved resilience, nutrition and income of Flagship Project 5: Improving Livelihoods at scale 128 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Jessica Evelyn RANERI Current position and affiliation: Nutrition Research Support Officer, Bioversity International Profile: Public Health Nutrition, Clinical Nutrition, Development Economics Employment: • 2015 –present: Nutrition Research Support Officer, Bioversity International (IPGRI) Rome, Italy • 2012 –2015 - Nutrition Programme Specialist, Bioversity International (IPGRI) Rome, Italy • AUG 2012 – OCT 2012, Consultant, Gruppo Social Fondo Ecuatoriano Popularum Progressio, Quito, Ecuador • JUNE 2010 – JUNE 2012, Research Assistant, Bioversity International (lPGRI), Rome, Italy Education: 2012-present Doctor of Applied Biological Sciences (Food Science and Nutrition), Ghent University, Belgium. 2008-2012 Master of Human Development and Food Security (Development Economics), Roma Tre Universitá Degli Studi, Italy Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) Termote, C., Raneri, J., Deptford, A. & Cogill, B. Screening Wild Foods for Reducing the Cost of a Nutritionally Adequate Diet in Kenya. Food and Nutrition Bulletin 2014; 35:458-479 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Bioversity International Institutional Focal Point for the Humidtropics CRP (2015-16), Lead of Nutrition Cluster of Activities in the cross-cutting Flagship of Humidtropics CRP (2014-2016) Role in RTB: Cluster Support Leader CC5.2: Sustainable intensification and diversification for improved resilience, nutrition and income of Flagship Project 5: Improving Livelihoods at scale 129 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Netsayi Noris MUDEGE Current position and affiliation: Gender Research Scientist (CIP-Nairobi) Profile: rural development, agriculture, education, health, gender analysis and gender mainstreaming Employment: • 2013-current: Gender Research Scientist International Potato Centre, Kenya and Peru • 2010-2013: Technical Advisor Royal Tropical Institute (KIT), the Netherlands • 2007-2010: Associate Research Scientists African Population and Health Research Center, Kenya • 2006-2007: Lecturer Sociology Department, University of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe Education: • 2005: PhD Social Science, Wageningen Universiteit and Research Centrum, Netherlands • 2001: MSc Sociology and Social Anthropology, University of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications: 1) N.N Mudege, Nyekanyeka, T.; Kapalasa, E.; Chevo, T.; Demo, P. (2015) Understanding collective action and women's empowerment in potato farmer groups in Ntcheu and Dedza in Malawi. Journal of Rural Studies 42, 91–101 2) N.N Mudege, Chevo, T.; Nyekanyeka, T.; Kapalasa, E.; Demo, P. (2015) Gender norms and Access to extension services and training among potato farmers in Dedza and Ntcheu in Malawi. The Journal of Agriculture Education and Extension pp1–15, iFirst 10.1080/1389224X.2015.1038282 3) N.N Mudege, Kapalasa, E.; Chevo, T.; Nyekanyeka, T.; Demo, P. (2015) Gender norms and the marketing of seeds and ware potatoes in Malawi. Journal of Gender Agriculture and Food Security 1 (2), 18-41 4) N.N. Mudege and C. Kwangwari, (2013) Women and Participation in civil society – do women get empowered? The case of Goromonzi District in Zimbabwe. Journal of Women, Politics and Policy 34(3):238- 260 5) N.N Mudege and Zulu, E.M. (2011) Discourses of Illegality and exclusion: When water access matters Global Public Health: An International Journal for Research Policy and Practice 6(3): 221-233 6) Mudege, N. N. and Ezeh, A. C., (2009), Gender, aging, poverty and health: Survival strategies of older men and women in Nairobi slums. Journal of Aging Studies 23(4): 245-257 Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: Research PI and project manager: Integrating gender in RTB thematic research to enhance development outcomes 2013-2016: USD1 000 000 every two years. (IITA, CIAT, CIP and Bioversity) Team leader and co-project manager 2011-2012: Building Skills for Life: Empowering Adolescent girls through education (230 000 British Pounds - Plan UK and Royal Tropical Institute Amsterdam). A mixed method baseline research project implemented in 9 countries Pakistan, Cambodia, El Salvador, Mali, Malawi, Zimbabwe, Sierra Leone, Rwanda & Kenya. Programme Assistant Coordinator 2007-2010: Urban Health and Poverty Dynamics Project implemented by African Population and Health Research Center funded by the Welcome Trust (£5million over 5 years). I coordinated research activities had financial oversight of the budget, monitored and program progress and reported to program PI. Principal Investigator/Team Leader 2007-2008: Formative evaluation of the Presidential Initiative on AIDS Strategy for Communication to the Youth (PIASCY) (USD 100 000 APHRC and Population Council). Designed study and implemented it, managed reporting functions and donor relations. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CC5.3: Gender equitable development and youth employment of Flagship Project 5: Improving Livelihoods at scale. 130 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Cees LEEUWIS Current position and affiliation: Professor of Knowledge, Technology and Innovation, Wageningen University, the Netherlands Profile -field of expertise: innovation, communication, socio-technical change, adoption, extension, social learning, inter- and transdisciplinary research, agricultural innovation systems, development Employment: 2012- present: Professor of Knowledge, Technology and Innovation, Wageningen University 2002-2012: Professor Communication and Innovation Studies, Wageningen University 1993-2002: Assistant/Associate prof. Communication and Innovation Studies, Wageningen University Education: 1993: PhD in Communication and Innovation Studies (cum laude), Wageningen University, Netherlands 1988: MSc in Rural Sociology (cum laude), Wageningen University, Netherlands Selected Recent Peer-reviewed publications 1) Arkesteijn, M. C. M., van Mierlo, B., & Leeuwis, C. (2015). The need for reflexive evaluation approaches in development cooperation. Evaluation: The International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 21(1), 99- 115. 2) Schut, M. L. W., Klerkx, L. W. A., Sartas, M., Lamers, D., McCampbell, M., Ogbonna, H., Leeuwis, C. (2015). Innovation platforms: experiences with their institutional embedding in agricultural research for development. Experimental Agriculture. 3) Milgroom, J., Giller, K. , & Leeuwis, C. (2014). Three interwoven dimensions of natural resource use: Quantity, quality and access in the Great Limpopo transfrontier conservation area. Human Ecology, 42(2), 199-215. 4) Totin, G. G. E., Leeuwis, C., van Mierlo, B. C., Mongbo, R., Stroosnijder, L., & Kossou, D. K. (2014). Drivers of cooperative choice: canal maintenance in smallholder irrigated rice production in Benin. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 12(3), 334-354. 5) Kilelu, C.W., Klerkx, L. & Leeuwis, C. (2013). Unravelling the role of innovation platforms in supporting co- evolution of innovation: Contributions and tensions in a smallholder dairy development programme (online first). Agricultural Systems, 118, 65-77. 6) Basu, S. and Leeuwis, C. (2012). Understanding the rapid spread of SRI in Andhra Pradesh: Exploring the building of support networks and media representation. Agricultural Systems, 111, 34-44. 7) Gildemacher, P.R., Leeuwis, C., Demo, P., Borus, D., Schulte-Geldermann, E., Kinyae, P., Mundia, P., Nyongesa, M. & Struik, P.C. (2012). Positive selection in seed potato production in Kenya as a case of successful research- led innovation. International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development, 11(1), 67-92. Other Evidence of Leadership, large-program management and delivery: • Programme leader of: Responsible life-sciences innovations for development in the digital age: Environmental Virtual Observatories for Connective Action (EVOCA) in crop, water, livestock and disease management Financed by INREF (2015-2021) • Humidtropics CRP: Strategic Research Theme leader ‘Scaling and Institutional Innovation’, member of the Management Team (2013-2016) • The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) as a socio-economic and technical movement in India, funded by WOTRO (2010-2014). PhD supervisor. • Positive Deviance as a Catalyst for Sustainable Food Production and Nutrition in the Andes, funded by WOTRO (2011-2015) Principal Investigator. • Convergence of Sciences – Strengthening Innovation Systems. Phase 2 action research programme in Ghana, Mali and Benin funded by DGIS, (2007-2013). Active as member of the scientific board and PhD supervisor. Role in RTB: Cluster Leader CC5.4: Institutional innovation and scaling of Flagship Project 5.4: Improving livelihood at scale. 1 131 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 7 Name: Dietmar STOIAN Current position and affiliation: Principal Scientist, Value Chains and Private Sector Engagement, Bioversity International, France Profile: Dietmar leads Bioversity International's research on value chains and private sector engagement, with more than 20 years of experience in development-relevant research at the interface between value chains, smallholder livelihoods, and their enabling environment. He has developed the multi-chain approach aimed at food security, enhanced nutrition, employment and income, as well as the building of household and business assets across a portfolio of value chains that accounts for market, livelihood and dietary diversity. Employment • 2012-2015: Leader, Commodity Systems and Genetic Resources Program, Bioversity International, France • 2001-2012: Leader, Competitiveness and Value Chains Program, CATIE, Costa Rica • 1996-2000: Research Fellow, Inst. of Forest Policy, Markets & Marketing Section, Univ. of Freiburg, Germany • 1994-1996: Advisor to the Community Forestry Development Program, German Development Service, Nepal Education • 2000: Ph.D., Forest Economics, University of Freiburg, Germany • 1993: Diploma (M.Sc. equivalent), Forest Sciences, University of Freiburg, Germany Selected recent peer-reviewed publications 1) Donovan, J., Stoian, D., and Lundy, M. 2016. Inclusive value-chain development: Challenges and approaches. In: Innovation for inclusive value-chain development: Successes and challenges. (André Devaux, Maximo Torero, Jason Donovan, and Douglas Horton, Eds). IFPRI. 2) Stoian, D., Donovan, J., Fisk, J., and Muldoon, M. 2015. Value chain development for rural poverty reduction: A reality check and a warning. In: Financial and market integration of vulnerable people: lessons from development programmes. (Linda Jones, Ed.). Practical Action Publishing. 3) Stoian, D., Donovan, J., and Elias, M. 2015. Linking livelihoods and gender with value chain development: The case for a multi-chain approach to rural poverty reduction. Paper presented at the Agri-Gender and PIM Writeshop, IFPRI, Germany. 4) Orr, A., Donovan, J., and Stoian, D. 2015. Smallholder value chains as complex adaptive systems: A conceptual framework. Socioeconomic Discussion Paper Series 36. ICRISAT. 5) Proietti, C., Wittine, D., Alvarez, S., Parker, M., Schulte-Geldermann, E., Stoian, D., Karamura, E., and Thiele, G. 2015. Co-constructing impact pathways with stakeholders for results-based management. RTB Brief 1 (March 2015). CIP. 6) Stoian, D. and Donovan, J. 2013. An asset-based approach to achieving pro-poor value chain development – Introduction to 5Capitals case studies. In: Assessing impacts of value chain development on poverty – A case- study companion to the 5Capitals tool. (Ree Sheck, Jason Donovan, and Dietmar Stoian, Eds.). CATIE/ICRAF/Bioversity International. 7) Donovan, J. and Stoian, D. 2012. 5Capitals: A tool for assessing the poverty impacts of value chain development. CATIE. Other evidence of leadership, large-program management and delivery As Program Leader at CATIE and Bioversity, Dietmar has led program planning, implementation, and M&E, with responsibility of 50+ staff and annual budgets of up to US$12-14 million. He has served on Bioversity's Leadership Team and Research Coordination Committee and as Center Focal Point to RTB (2012-2015) and PIM (since 2015) where he also serves on the Management Committee (since 2016). Role in RTB: Cluster Support co-leader CC5.4 and principal investigator for several activities under FP4 and FP5, in particular: 1) institutional innovations in RTB value chains for SME development involving women and the youth; 2) inter- and intra-household variation in smallholder livelihoods, and opportunities for increased gender-equitable benefits derived from value chain participation; 3) asset-based approaches and impact assessments with regard to the development of RTB value chains and livelihoods dependent on these; and 4) impactful partnership and scaling models, with emphasis on public-private and private-civil society arrangements. His time commitment to RTB is estimated at 25%. 132 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 8 ANNEX 8: RTB Open Access and Open Data 1. Planning for and implementing OA/OD in accordance with the CGIAR OADM Policy and FAIR principles, including critical issues and anticipated challenges As a time bound Research Program, RTB will rely on program participants and third party subject specific repositories for long term preservation and accessibility of the information products produced within RTB. All but one of the program participants are implementing the CGIAR Open Access and Data Management Policy (OADMP) and its implementation guidelines, and one program participant which is not a CGIAR Center, is also embracing Open Access contractually for its work in RTB. All RTB partners will contractually be bound by the OADMP in their activities within RTB. All program participants will be required to implement the CGIAR Core Metadata scheme for achieving cross-harvesting and interoperability of different information products. The RTB Open Access Portal will be located in the RTB website and will provide a single entry point to all RTB information products. OA information products located in various repositories will be marked with RTB metadata and their access links and metadata will be harvested and made accessible via the RTB Open Access Portal. An RTB CGSpace and an RTBDataverse (or equivalents) are envisaged for (1) RTB generated information products which are not deposited elsewhere; and (2) for duplication of certain information products if their original repositories are not compliant with the requirements of OADMP. RTB program participants and partners will be encouraged to deposit information products in a recommended file format to facilitate long-term preservation (see list below of recommended file formats). For files in other formats, a derivative copy in a more stable format will be created if feasible. In these cases, both versions and associated metadata will be deposited in the repositories and harvested by RTB Open Access Portal. Program Participants’ Dataverse and CGSpace repositories will provide long-term access to submitted works along with associated metadata. Recommended file formats for data and publications: Format File Extensions Acrobat PDF/A .pdf Comma-separated values .csv Open Office formats .odt, .ods, .odp Plain text (US-ASCII, UTF-8) .txt XML .xml Shapefiles and raster files for GIS data .shp, .tifw, .asc Multimedia and pictures .jpg In addition to providing greater access to knowledge, Open Access and Open Data will allow others to reuse information products through appropriate open licenses. A variety of open licenses exist. RTB will promote the use of the Creative Commons Attribution licenses (CC-BY 4.0 or CC-BY NC 4.0) which are becoming the norm for Open Access and Open Data policies and donor requirements. The GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) will be encouraged for software and programming codes. 133 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 8 2. Technical considerations and operations In order to achieve syntactic interoperability of repositories RTB program participants will be encouraged to use standards such as XML and SQL for data exchange among machines, as well as semantic interoperability through repositories that support the OAI-PMH protocol and/or are compatible with SPARQL, O-data, JSON. The use of CG Core Metadata Schema will be required from all program participants. Dataverse and CGSpace provide the necessary interoperability when combined with relevant metadata that will enable retrieval of specific datasets. Dataverse has an API (a protocol that specifies how the software interacts with other programs) to search and access the datasets and will soon provide features for the conversion of data into the Linked Open Data compliant formats (RDF). The following table indicates the intended repositories and platforms for housing the information products. Table 1. Identification of repository or platform housing information products from RTB flagships and clusters for indicative datatypes. Indicative Datatype Repository or Platform Name/s URL/s Roots, tubers and bananas RTB Multi-Genomes Hub http://www.cassavagenome.org/ Banana/ Plantain Promusa www.promusa.org MGIS – Musa germplasm information http://www.crop-diversity.org/mgis/ system Banana genome hub http://banana-genome.cirad.fr/ Musabase https://musabase.org/ Cassava Cassavabase www.cassavabase.org Potato Global Trial Data Management https://research.cip.cgiar.org/confluence/displa System y/GDET4RT/Home Biomart http://www.biomart.org/ Sweetpotato SweetPotatoBase www.sweetpotatobase.org Sweetpotato Knowledge Portal http://www.sweetpotatoknowledge.org/ Yam Yambase www.yambase.org Agronomy (incl. for improved natural resource AgTrials www.agtrials.org management, to address climate change) GIS/ remote sensing CGIAR Consortium for Spatial www.cgiar-csi.org Information RTBMaps www.rtb.cgiar.org/RTBMaps ArcGIS www.arcgis.com Genebank GeneSYS www.genesis-pgr.org Genetic/ genomic NCBI www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov Phytozone phytozome.jgi.doe.gov/pz/portal.html Plant breeding (incl. for improved natural Integrated Breeding Platform www.integratedbreeding.net resource management, to address climate change) Socioeconomic (incl. food security, poverty aWhere www.awhere.com alleviation, livelihoods, nutrition...) Dataverse Project dataverse.org AgEcon ageconsearch.umn.edu 134 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 8 3. Coordination and decision making Each program participant will be responsible for the curation, quality control and availability of its information products in OADMP compliant repositories. RTB will receive the support of the lead center Knowledge and Data Management team to coordinate and link access to these information products via the RTB Open Access Portal. As information products become available, program participants will be required to report these within the RTB M&EL platform (PMELP) for monitoring compliance with the time frames established in the OADMP. RTB will benefit from the established CGIAR Knowledge Management and Data Management communities of practice for addressing practical challenges. Legal challenges such as licensing, privacy and confidentiality will be addressed within the program participants and when necessary by the RTB IP Task Force. Table 2. List of Key staff for OA and OD coordination within RTB Program Staff responsible for OA coordination Staff responsible for OD coordination participant Name and position Name and position Bioversity Michael Halewood Michael Halewood Leader, Genetic Resources Policies, Leader, Genetic Resources Policies, Institutions Institutions and Monitoring Group and Monitoring Group CIAT Leroy Mwanzia Leroy Mwanzia Data and Information Manager Data and Information Manager CIP – Lead Cecilia Ferreyra Henry Juarez Center Acting Knowledge Management and Open Research Informatics Unit Access Manager IITA Martin Mueller Morenike Abu E-Research Coordinator Contracts Compliance Officer CIRAD Pending designation Pending designation 4. Narrative for required resources (e.g. human and financial) Specific budget has not been earmarked for OA, however some PMU funding may be allocated for the development of the infrastructure and implementation of specific collaborative activities. RTB FP and clusters will budget for data management and OA publication fees. It is estimated that budget would be around 0.5% of total. 135 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 9 ANNEX 9: Intellectual Assets Management Intellectual Assets (IA) management will contribute to the delivery of research results to next users. Table 1 provides some examples of the envisaged IA management and delivery strategies identified per flagship project (FP) and expected product. At this stage of program development and design it is difficult to foresee a fully detailed IA portfolio (all results of research and development activities) and the best IA management strategies for each one of these. FP leaders and cluster leaders are renowned experts in their fields and are best positioned to evaluate the state-of-the-art of scientific and technological development in their fields. This expertise enables RTB to identify third party intellectual assets which may benefit RTB research and acquire these with freedom to operate (FTO) or licensing. RTB program participants have designated Intellectual Property (IP) Focal Points, who are lawyers and project administrators with very complementary sets of skills. The proposed RTB IP Task Force will bring together these IP Focal Points and create a synergetic, hybrid resource for RTB to explore available intellectual assets management options. The ToR of the RTB IP Task Force is provided (below). Terms of Reference for the RTB IP Task Force The RTB IP Task Force is composed of the IP Focal Points of the RTB program participants. The RTB Tasks Force will have regular meetings once every quarter and extraordinary meetings whenever requested by an IP Focal Point or RTB flagship and/or RTB cluster leader or RTB Program Director and called by the RTB Compliance and Intellectual Assets Manger, who will assure proper interaction and communication with the RTB PMU. There will be one in-person meeting per year during the CGIAR IP/Legal Network annual meeting as a one day side event (subject to availability of funding) There will be 3 further online meetings a year to complement the in person meeting. The objective of the RTB IP Task Force is four folds: • To review various IA developments (pipeline) at cluster level at different program participants and provide feedback on available options for compliance and delivery strategy. • To act as a resource group for the RTP program participants, Program Director, flagship and cluster leaders. • To create an enabling cross learning environment from the expertise and experiences of the program participants and their IP Focal Points. • To provide reasoned opinions on actual or potential disagreements on IP related matters upon request of RTB governance bodies. The proceedings of the meeting will be reported in writing to the RTB Program Director for communication as appropriate to the relevant flagship and cluster leaders. Upon request of one of the participants on a cases by case basis, certain issues or documents may be reviewed by the RTB IP Task Force on a confidential basis. At its first meeting, the RTB IP Task Force may adopt its rules of procedure and modifies these thereafter upon confirmation of the IP Focal Points representing the simple majority (50% +1) of program participants. 136 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 9 Table 1 provides options for 5 delivery strategies which may be used alone or in combination for each cluster product. OAP: Open Access Publication OAD: Open Access Data WS & T: Workshop and Training for next users IPR & RL: Intellectual Property Rights & Responsible Licensing (for achieving impact) FD: Free Dissemination Most probable strategy is marked with a 1, the secondary strategy is marked with a 2, and if a strategy is inapplicable or not envisaged at this stage it is marked with 0. Table 1: Intellectual Assets delivery strategy by FP. Delivery strategy FP Research products Next user(s) OAP OAD WS&T IPR&L FD Documentation, communication RTB breeders and and promotion for use of national partners populations and elite breeding involved in varietal 1 1 2 0 2 lines selection and release Proof of concept of transgenic RTB National partners, varieties variety release 1 1 0 2 0 professionals, New genetic modification Scientists and technologies biotechnology 1 1 2 2 2 technicians Ex-ante/ex-post socioeconomic Policy makers, decision studies on game changing makers, Science leaders 1 1 0 0 1 solutions and donors Characterization and knowledge Breeders, management for RTB genetic conservationists, 1 1 2 0 1 diversity genebanks National partners, Models and DSS for managing RTB private sector seed seed degeneration for supply of multipliers, farmers quality seed using farm saved seed 1 0 1 0 0 and community seed banks Banana cultivars/hybrids adapted to farmers’, consumers’ and National partners, markets’ needs, ready for large- farmers, seed businesses 0 0 0 2 1 scale dissemination Improved cassava processing Farmers, farmer- technologies that maximize value processors, processors, 1 0 1 0 1 addition and reduce waste agri-food businesses 137 FP2: Adapted productive varieties and quality seed of RTB crops FP1: Enhanced genetic resources RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 9 Delivery strategy FP Research products Next user(s) OAP OAD WS&T IPR&L FD Rapid multiplication, tools and methods for potato seed Public and private sector production and on-farm seed seed multipliers 1 0 1 2 1 health management Agile and resilient potato varieties Farmers, national adapted for intensifying and partners, seed 0 0 1 2 1 diversifying cereal-based systems producers Development Guidelines, technologies, and professionals, seed diagnostic tools for improving system specialists, seed 1 0 1 0 1 OFSP seed systems companies and national partners High ratio propagation techniques Seed multipliers, and certification for quality yam farmers, national 1 2 1 0 1 seed partners Predictions of pest and pathogen National decision population evolution and makers, breeders, 1 1 1 0 1 distribution affecting RTB crops donors, farmers Affordable and environmentally friendly crop protection practices Framers, national for RTB crops partners 1 0 1 0 2 Strategies for surveillance, eradication and exclusion of National partners and banana fungal and bacterial extension services, 1 1 1 0 2 diseases. farmers Tools for improved containment National partners and and quarantine of Banana viral extension services, plant diseases (BBTD) protection agencies, 1 1 1 0 2 farmers Cost-effective extension methodologies for cassava National partners and biological constraints in Asia and extension services 2 2 1 0 1 Americas Genebanks, plant Protocols for safe germplasm protection agencies, exchange of cassava in Africa extension services, 2 2 1 0 0 breeders Technologies and management options for RTB post-harvest loss Framers, extension reduction and value-addition to services, processors. 2 2 1 0 1 waste products 138 FP4: Nutritious RTB food and FP3: Resilient crops added value RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 9 Delivery strategy FP Research products Next user(s) OAP OAD WS&T IPR&L FD Product specifications and Farmers, processors, processing protocols for high agri-food businesses, quality and safe cassava-based national extension 1 1 1 0 0 food products services, policy makers Technologies and procedures for demand-driven, gender-sensitive Farmers, processors, development of nutritious food agri-food businesses, products based on biofortified national extension 2 2 1 0 0 cassava services, NGO’s Evidence base, policy options, and Policy makers, national investment guides for sustained partners, NGO’s, donors, investments in nutritious development 1 1 1 0 0 sweetpotato professionals Context-specific household RTB scientists, decision typologies, farming system makers, national modeling and trade-off analysis partners, investors, 1 1 2 0 0 tools for RTB crops donors, agri-food businesses. Strategies and options for agricultural innovations targeting National partners, gender transformation and women extension services, 1 1 1 0 0 empowerment NGO’s, Client-oriented strategies for Scientists, national technology development and partners, universities, 1 1 1 0 0 refinement in scaling extension services, 139 FP5: Improved livelihoods at scale RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 A ANNEX 10 A: RTB Abbreviations and Acronyms 3R genes 3 Resistance Genes to Phytophthora infestans A4NH CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (Global Integrating CRP) AFS Agri-Food System AGUAPAN Asociación de Guardianes de Papa Nativa, Peru ALINe Agricultural Learning and Impact Network ARI Agricultural Research Institute ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa AVRDC The World Vegetable Center BA Banana BAPNET Banana Asia Pacific Network BARNESA Banana Research Network for Eastern and /southern Africa BBTD/BBTV Banana bunchy top disease / Banana bunchy top virus BCoP Breeding Community of Practice BecA Bioscience Eastern and Central Africa BGI Beijing Genomics Institute, China BINGO Big international Non-Governmental Organization Bioversity Bioversity International BMGF Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation BMZ Bundesministerium für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Germany BTI Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research at Cornell University BXW Banana Xanthomonas Wilt CA Cassava CABI Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau International, UK CapDev Capacity Development CARBAP Centre Africain de Recherches sur Bananiers et Plantains, Cameroun CAS Chinese Academy of Science CATAS Chinese Academy of Tropical Agricultural Sciences CATIE Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza, Costa Rica CBB Cassava Bacterial Blight CBSD Cassava Brown Streak Disease CC Crosscutting CCAFS CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (Global Integrating CRP) 140 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 A CCARDESA Centre for Coordination of Agricultural Research and Development for Southern Africa CGIAR Organization dedicated to international agricultural research CIALCA Consortium for Improving Agriculture Based Livelihood Systems in Central Africa CIAT International Center for Tropical Agriculture CIP International Potato Center CIRAD Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le développement Cluster Cluster of Activity CM Cassava Mealybug CMD Cassava Mosaic Disease CN Cyanide CNRA Centre National de Recherche Agronomique, Cote d’Ivoire CoP Community of Practice CORAF West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development (CORAF/WECARD) CORPOICA Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria CRI Crops Research Institute, Ghana CRISPR Clustered, regularly interspaced, short palindromic repeat ; genome editing tool CRP CGIAR Research Program CRS Catholic Relief Service CSTRU Cassava and Starch Technology Research Unit, Kasetsart University Thailand CTCRI Central Tuber Crops Research Institute, India CWB Cassava Witches Broom CWR Crop Wild Relative DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Australia DARS Department of Agricultural Research Services, Malawi DArTseq Diversity Arrays Technology Sequencing DCL CGIAR Research Program on Dryland Cereals and Legumes (AFS-CRP) DFID Department for International Development, United Kingdom DG Director General DGD Belgium Directorate General for Development Cooperation, Belgium DI Discovery DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid DoA(E) Department of Agriculture (Extension), Thailand 141 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 A DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo DRD Department for Research and Development, Tanzania DSS Decision Support System DST Decision Support Tool EARI Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute EMBRAPA Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation EPPO European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization ETH Eidgenoessische Technische Hochschule, Switzerland FAIR Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Re-usable FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FARA Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa FAVRI Fruits and Vegetables Research Institute, Vietnam FERA Fera Science Ltd. FOC TR4 Fusarium oxysproum f.sp. cubense – Tropical Race 4 (a.k.a. Panama Disease) FONTAGRO Fondo Regional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria FoodSTART Root and Tuber Crops Research & Development Programme for Food Security in the Asia and the Pacific Region FP Flagship Project FSD Frog Skin Disease FTA CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (AFS-CRP) GBS Genotyping by Sequencing GCARD Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development GENNOVATE Enabling gender equality in agricultural and environmental innovation GHG Greenhouse Gas GI-CRP Global Integration CRP GIS Geographic Information System GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GM(O) Genetically Modified (Organism) GS Genomic Selection GxE Genotype by Environment Interaction HH Household HTP High Throughput Phenotyping Humidtropics CGIAR Research Program on Integrated Systems for the Humid Tropics IA Intellectual Assets IAPSC Inter-African Phytosanitary Council ICM Integrated Crop Management 142 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 A ICRAF World Agroforestry Centre ICT Information and Communications Technology IDH The Sustainable Trade Initiative IDIAF Instituto Dominicano de Investigaciones Agropecuarias y Forestales, Republica Dominicana IDO Intermediate Development Outcome IEA Independent Evaluation Arrangement IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute IIAM Agricultural Research Institute of Mozambique IICA Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture ILAC Institutional Learning and Change Initiative ILRI International Livestock Research Institute INA Impact Network Analysis INERA Institut National pour l’Etude et la Recherche Agronomiques, DR Congo INIA Instituto Nacional de Innovación Agraria, Peru INIAP Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, Ecuador INISAV Instituto de Investigaciones de Sanidad Vegetal, Cuba INRA Institut National pour l’Etude et la Recherche Agronomiques IP Intellectual Property Right IP(D)M Integrated Pest (and Disease )Management IPB Institut Pertanian Bogor (Bogor Agricultural University) Indonesia IPG International Public good IPPC International Plant Protection Convention IRAF Institut de Recherches Agronomiques et Forestières, Gabon IRD Institut de Recherche pour le Développement IRR Internal Rate of Return ISABU Institut des Sciences Agronomiques du Burundi ISC Independent Steering Committee ITC International (Musa Germplasm) Transit Center KALRO Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization KSU Kansas State University KU Leuven Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium LAMP Loop Mediated Amplification LB Late Blight 143 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 A LCA Life Cycle Assessment LIVESTOCK CGIAR Research Program on Livestock (AFS-CRP) M&EL Monitoring and evaluation and learning MAIZE CGIAR Research Program on Maize MELIA Monitoring, Evaluation, Leaning and Impact Assessment MGIS Musa Germplasm Information System MSU Michigan State University MUSALAC Red Latinoamericana y del Caribe para la Investigación y el Desarrollo de las Musaceas MusaNet Global collaborative framework for Musa genetic resources NaCRRI National Agricultural Crops Resources Research Institute, Uganda NAR(E)S National Agricultural Research (and Extension) Systems NARITA High-yielding and disease-resistant banana hybrids NARO National Agricultural Research Organization, Uganda NGO Non-Governmental Organization NIRS Near infrared spectroscopy NPV Net present Value NRCB National Research Centre for Banana, India NRCRI National Root Crops Research Institute, Nigeria NRI Natural Resources Institute, UK NSTDA - BIOTEC National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology, Thailand OA Open Access OD Open Data OFSP Orange-fleshed sweetpotato PATH Health-related not for profit organization PCR Polymerase Chain Reaction PD Program Director PDM Pest and Disease Management PIA Program Implementation Arrangement PIM CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions and Markets (Global Integrating CRP) PMELP Planning, monitoring, evaluation and learning platform (IT solution) PMU Program Management Unit PO Potato PPP Public Private Partnership PRA Pest Risk Assessment PROINPA Fundación PROINPA, Bolivia 144 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 A ProMusa Knowledge-sharing Platform on Bananas PVS Participatory Varietal Selection QDPM Quality Declared Planting Material QTL Quantitative Trait Loci R&D Research and development R4D Research for development RAB Rwanda Agricultural Board RAD Restriction Associated DNA RBM Results Based Management RCTs Randomized Controlled Trials RHUL Royal Holloway University of London RICE CGIAR Research Program on Rice (AFS-CRP) RMT Rapid Multiplication Technology RNA Ribonucleic Acid RNAi RNA interference RTB CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas SADC South African Development Community SARI Savanna Agricultural Research Institute, Ghana SDC Swiss Development Cooperation SDG Sustainable Development Goal SID Sustainable Intensification and Diversification SLO System-level Outcome SME Small and Medium Enterprises SMTA Standard Material Transfer Agreement SNP Single Nucleotide Polymorphism SRF CGIAR Strategy and Results Framework sRSA Small RNA Sequencing and Assembly SSA Sub-Saharan Africa SSCM Site Specific Crop Manager SSNM Site Specific Nutrient Management SU Syracuse University, USA SUN Scaling Up Nutrition (movement) SW Sweetpotato ToC Theory of Change UAK Université d’Agriculture de Kétou, Benin UCLA University of California, Los Angeles 145 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 A UDSM University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania UM University of Miami, USA UNAN National Autonomous University of Nicaragua UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNIKIN University of Kinshasa, DR Congo UNIKIS University of Kisangani, DR Congo UPLB University of the Philippines Los Baños UQ University of Queensland, Australia USAID United States Agency for International Development VAAS Vietnam Academy of Agriculture Sciences VAD Vitamin A Deficiency W1/2/3 CGIAR funding windows WHEAT CGIAR Research Program on Wheat (AFS-CRP) WLE CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystem (Global Integrating CRP) WUR Wageningen University and Research Centre YA Yam ZARI Zambia Agriculture Research Institute 146 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B ANNEX 10 B: References Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). 2015. Africa Agriculture Status Report: Youth in Agriculture in Sub- Saharan Africa. Nairobi, Kenya. Issue No. 3. Brooks, K., Zorya, S., & Gautam, A. 2012. Employment in agriculture; Jobs for Africa’s youth, 2012 Global Food Policy Report, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). CGIAR. 2013. Assessment of the status of Gender Mainstreaming in CGIAR research programs. CGIAR Consortium, prepared by Ashby, J., Lubbock, A., and Stuart, H. CGIAR. 2015, Final Results for identifying countries for Site Integration+ and Site Integration++. Based on results of survey for Steps 1, 2 and 3. Version: 23/07/2015 (unpublished) Christensen, C.M. 2000, Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail (Management of Innovation and Change) Harvard Business Review Press Davey, M.W., Van den Bergh, I., Markham, R., Swennen, R. and J. Keulemans. 2009. Genetic variability in Musa fruit provitamin A carotenoids, lutein and mineral micronutrient contents. Food Chemistry 115(3): 806–813. Eames-Sheavly, M., Hadekel, Ch., McGregor Hedstrom, A., Patchen, A., Stewart, E. and J. Wilkins. 2011. Discovering our food system. Experiential Learning & Action for Youth and Their Communities. Cornell University, Department of horticulture. (http://blogs.cornell.edu/garden/files/2011/05/cgbl-dofs-curriculum5.pdf). FAO CTA IFAD, 2014. Youth and agriculture: Key challenges and concrete solutions. Published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in collaboration with the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). Rome. FAO. 2011. The State of Food and Agriculture 2010–2011. Women in Agriculture. Closing the gender gap for development. FAO, Rome. FAO. 2014. The State of Food and Agriculture: Innovation in family farming. FAO, Rome FAOStat Production. Accessed on July 13, 2015. http://faostat3.fao.org/download/Q/QC/E Fischer, W. and Qaim, M. 2012. Linking Smallholders to Markets: Determinants and Impacts of Farmer Collective Action in Kenya. World Development 40(6): 1255–1268. Horton, D., G. Prain, and G. Thiele. (2010). Perspectives on Partnership: Highlights of a Literature Review. ILAC Brief 25. Howeler, R. 2014 - Sustainable soil and crop management of cassava in Asia– Cali, CO: Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT). IEA (Independent Evaluation Arrangement). 2015. Evaluation of CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). Rome, Italy: Independent Evaluation Arrangement (IEA) of the CGIAR. IEA (Independent Evaluation Arrangement). 2014. Review of CGIAR Research Programs Governance and Management. IFPRI. 2015. IMPACT version 3.2, 8 September ISPC, SPIA. 2014. Adoption of modern varieties of food crops in Sub-Saharan Africa. Impact Brief No. 42. Margolis, A. and E., Buckingham. 2013. The Importance of Gender in Linking Agriculture to Sustained Nutritional Outcomes. Agriculture and Nutrition Global Learning and Evidence Exchange (AgN-GLEE), Joint USAID & SPRING conference, Guatemala City, Guatemala from March 5-7. Mudege, N.N.; T. Chevo, T. Nyekanyeka, E. Kapalsa and P. Demo. 2015. Gender norms and access to extension services and training among potato farmers in Dedza and Ntcheu in Malawi.Journal Article The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension. (UK). ISSN 1389-224X. Published online 13 May 2015. 16p. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2015.1038282 Robinson, J. and C.S. Srinivasan. 2013. Case-Studies on the Impact of Germplasm Collection, Conservation, Characterization and Evaluation (GCCCE) in the CGIAR. CGIAR Standing Panel on Impact Assessment. - See more at: http://ciatblogs.cgiar.org/support/spotlight-on-ciats-cassava-research-in-asia/#sthash.tUemKW5p.dpuf RTB. 2011. Roots, Tubers and Bananas for food security and income. RTB Proposal. 199p. 147 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B RTB. 2013. CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas- RTB Gender Strategy RTB. 2013a CGIAR Research Program on Roots Tubers and Bananas—RTB Gender Strategy http://www.rtb.cgiar.org/gender-publications/ RTB. 2013b. Gender Capacity Strengthening Plan for the CGIAR Research Program on Roots Tubers and Bananas RTB. 2013c. A Synthesis Report on Gender Research Undertaken by RTB Centers 2007–2012. Synthesized by Eva Rathgeber and N. N. Mudege, with input from gender focal points. Sarapura, S. 2012. Gender Analysis for the Assessment of Innovation Processes: The Case of Papa Andina in Peru. In: The World Bank. Agricultural Innovation Systems: An investment sourcebook. Washington, D.C., USA. pp. 598- 602. Thiele, G., Theisen, K., Bonierbale, M. and T. Walker. 2010. "Targeting the Poor and Hungry with Potato Science." Potato Journal 37(3-4): 75-86. UNDP. 2015. Revision of World Population Prospects - http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/ Woolley, Johnson, J. Ospina, V., Kemaga, B., Jordan, B., Harrison, T. and G. Thiele G. 2011. Incorporating stakeholder perspectives in international agricultural research; the case of the CGIAR Research Program for Roots, Tubers and Bananas for Food Security and Income. International Potato Center (CIP), Lima Peru. Social Science Working Paper 2011-3. World Bank, FAO, and IFAD. 2009. Gender in agriculture source book. Agriculture and Rural Development. World Bank: World development report 2015: mind, society, and behavior. World development report. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2014/11/20458440/world- development-report-2015-mind-society-behavior. World Bank, 2016. Shock Waves: Managing the Impacts of Climate Change on Poverty. RTB Priority Assessment Abdoulaye, T., Alene, A., Rusike, J. and A. Adebayo. 2014. Results of a global online expert survey: Major constraints, opportunities, and trends for yam production and marketing and priorities for future RTB yam research. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-4. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw Abdoulaye, T., Alene, A., Rusike, J. and A. Adebayo. 2014. Strategic Assessment of Yam Research Priorities. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-3. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw Alene, A., Oleke, J., Rusike, J., Abdoulaye, T., Creamer, B, Del Río, M. and J. Rodriguez. 2014. Strategic Assessment of Cassava Research Priorities. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-5. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw Creamer, B, Rusike, J., Gonzalez, C., Rodriguez, J.J., Abdoulaye, T. and A. Alene. 2014. Prioritization of options for Cassava research for development – Results from a global expert survey. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-6. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw Hareau, G., Kleinwechter, U., Pradel, W., Suarez, V., Okello, J. and S. Vikraman. 2014. Strategic Assessment of Research Priorities for Potato. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-8. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw Hareau, G., Kleinwechter, U., Pradel, W., Suarez, V., Okello, J. and S. Vikraman. 2014. Strategic Assessment of Research Priorities for Sweetpotato. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-9. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw Kleinwechter, U., Hareau, G. and V. Suarez. 2014. Prioritization of options for sweetpotato research for development – Results from a global expert survey. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-10. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw Kleinwechter, U., Hareau, G., V. Suarez. 2014. Prioritization of options for potato research for development - Results from a global expert survey. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-7. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw 148 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B Pemsl, D.E. and C. Staver. 2014. Strategic Assessment of Banana Research Priorities. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-1. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw Pemsl, D.E., Staver, C., Creamer, B., Abdoulaye, T., Alene, A. and J. Rusike. 2014. Results of a global online expert survey: Major constraints, opportunities and trends for banana production and marketing and priorities for future RTB banana research. Lima (Peru). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). RTB Working Paper 2014-2. Available online at: https://goo.gl/Ji2Vdw PART 2: FLAGSHIP LEVEL FP1: DISCOVERY RESEARCH FOR ENHANCED UTILIZATION OF RTB GENETIC RESOURCES Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF); NEXTGEN Cassava; CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). 2015: Workshop Report: Integrating End User Preferences in RTB Breeding Programs; February 26-27, 2015. Speke Resort, Munyonyo, Uganda Castañeda-Álvarez, N.P., de Haan, S., Juárez, H., Khoury, C.K., Achicanoy, H.A., Sosa, C.C., Bernau, V., Salas, A., Heider, B., Simon, R., Maxted, N. and D. Spooner. 2015. Ex situ conservation priorities for the wild relatives of potato (Solanum L. section Petota). PLOS ONE. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122599 potat Cenci, A.; Guignon, V.; Roux, N.; M. Rouard. 2014. Genomic analysis of NAC transcription factors in banana (Musa acuminata) and definition of NAC orthologous groups for monocots and dicots. Plant Molecular Biology 85(1- 2): 63-80. ISSN: 0167-4412 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11103-013-0169-2 De Haan, S., Polreich, S., Rodriguez, F., Juarez, H., Plasencia, F., Ccanto, R., Alvarez, C., Otondo, A., Sainz, H., Venegas, C. and J. Kalazich. 2014. A long-term systematic monitoring framework for on-farm conserved potato landrace diversity. Investigación e innovación para la seguridad y soberanía alimentaria en Bolivia in: Revista Científica de Investigación Info-INIAF. Milan, M., Otondo, A., Vicente, J.J., Cabrera, C. and J. Campero (eds.). No. 4, Vol. 1, 31-40. Folgado, R., Panis, B., Sergeant, K., Renaut, J., Swennen, R., and J.F. Hausman. 2013. Differential protein expression in response to abiotic stress in two potato species: Solanum commersonii Dun and Solanum tuberosum L. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 14, 4912-4933. http://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/14/3/4912. Folgado, R., Sergeant, K., Renaut, J., Swennen, D., Hausman, J.F., and B. Panis. 2014. Changes in sugar content and proteome of potato in response to cold and dehydration stress and their implications for cryopreservation. Journal of Proteomics, 98, 99-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2013.11.027. IEA. 2015. Evaluation of CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). Rome, Italy: Independent Evaluation Arrangement (IEA) of the CGIAR. Khoury C.K., Heider B., Castañeda-Álvarez N.P., Achicanoy H.A., Sosa C.C., Miller R.E., Scotland R.W., Wood J.R.I., Rossel G., Eserman L.A., Jarret R.L., Yencho G.C., Bernau V., Juarez H., Sotelo S., de Haan S. and P.C. Struik. 2015. Distributions, ex situ conservation priorities, and genetic resource potential of crop wild relatives of sweetpotato [Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam., I. series Batatas]. Frontiers Plant in Science 6:251. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00251 Kyndt, T., Quispe, D., Zhai, H., Jarret, R., Ghislain, M., Liu, Q., Gheysen, G., J.F. Kreuze. 2015. The genome of cultivated sweet potato contains Agrobacterium T-DNAs with expressed genes: An example of a naturally transgenic food crop. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112, 5844–5849. doi:10.1073/pnas.1419685112 Lindqvist-Kreuze, H., Gastelo, M., Perez, W., Forbes, G.A., de Koeyer, D., and M. Bonierbale. 2014. Phenotypic Stability and Genome-Wide Association Study of Late Blight Resistance in Potato Genotypes Adapted to the Tropical Highlands. Phytopathology June 2014, Volume 104, Number 6. Pages 624- 633.http://dx.doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-10-13-0270-R Nyaboga, E., Tripathi, J., Manoharan, R., L. Tripathi. 2014. Agrobacterium-mediated genetic transformation of yam (Dioscorea rotundata): An important tool for functional study of genes and crop improvement. Frontiers in Plant Science, 5(463): 1-14, ISSN 1664-462X. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3389/fpls.2014.00463 Pérez-de-Castro, A.m., S. Vilanova, J. Cañizares, L. Pascual, J.M. Blanca, M.J. Díez,J. Prohens, and B. Picó. 2012. Application of Genomic Tools in Plant Breeding. Curr Genomics. 2012 May; 13(3): 179–195. 149 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B Rabbi IY, Hamblin M, Gedil M. 2014a. Genetic Mapping Using Genotyping-by-Sequencing in the Clonally Propagated Cassava. Crop Sci. 1–13. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2013.07.0482 Rabbi IY, Hamblin MT, Kumar PL, et al. (2014b) High-resolution mapping of resistance to cassava mosaic geminiviruses in cassava using genotyping-by-sequencing and its implications for breeding. Virus Res 186:87– 96. doi: 10.1016/j.virusres.2013.12.028 RTB. 2015. RBM Pilot Report: Next Generation Breeding for Roots, Tubers and Bananas (NextGen Breeding). RTB. 2014. Workshop report: Accelerating genetic gains for Next Generation Breeding for Root, Tuber and Banana crops: approaches for Results Based Management (RBM). Särkinen, T.; Baden, M.; Gonzáles, P.; Cueva, M.; Giacomin, L.; Spooner, D.M.; Simon, R.; Juárez, H.; Nina, P.; Molina, J. and Sandra Knapp. 2015. Annotated checklist of Solanum L. (Solanaceae) for Peru. Revista peruana de biología 22(1): 003 – 062.doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15381/rpb.v22i1.11121 Tessema, G., Hyma, K. E., Asiedu, R., Mitchell, S. E., Gedil, M., Spillane, C. 2014. Next-generation sequencing based genotyping, cytometry and phenotyping for understanding diversity and evolution of guinea yams. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 127(8): 1783-1794, ISSN 0040-5752. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s00122-014-2339-2 Vanhove, A.-C., Vermaelen, W., Swennen, R., and Carpentier, S. 2015. A look behind the screens: Characterization of the HSP70 family during osmotic stress in a non-model crop. Journal of Proteomics, 119, 10-20. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1874391915000238 FP2: ADAPTED PRODUCTIVE VARIETIES AND QUALITY SEED OF RTB CROPS Calberto, G., Staver. C. and Siles. P., 2015. An assessment of global banana production and suitability under climate change scenarios, In: Climate change and food systems: global assessments and implications for food security and trade. Aziz Elbehri (editor). Food Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, 2015. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4332e/i4332e09.pdf Camacho-Henriquez, A., Kraemer, F., Galluzzi, G., de Haan, S., Jäger, M. and Christinck, A. 2015. Decentralized Collaborative Plant Breeding for Utilization and Conservation of Neglected and Underutilized Crop Genetic Resources. In Advances in Plant Breeding Strategies: Breeding, Biotechnology and Molecular Tools (pp. 25-61). Springer International Publishing. Ceballos, H., Kawuki, R.S., Gracen, V.E., Yencho, G.C. and Hershey, C.H. 2015. Conventional breeding, marker-assisted selection, genomic selection and inbreeding in clonally propagated crops: a case study for cassava. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 128(9), pp.1647-1667.Christinck, A., Weltzien,E. and Hoffmann V. (eds.). 2015. Setting Breeding Objectives and Developing Seed Systems with Farmers. A Handbook for Practical Use in Participatory Plant Breeding Projects. Margraf Publishers, Scientific Books, Weikersheim, Germany& Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA), Wageningen, The Netherlands. 188p. Davey, M.W., Saeys, W., Hof, E., Ramon, H., Swennen, R. and Keulemans, J. 2009. Application of visible and near- infrared reflectance spectroscopy (VIS/NIRS) to determine carotenoid contents in banana (Musa spp.) fruit pulp. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 57(5):1742-1751. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf803137d Farnworth, C.R. and Jiggins, J., 2003. Participatory plant breeding and gender analysis. PPB monograph 4. Cali: PRGA, CIAT. Fay, M., Hallegatte, S., Bangalore, M., Kane, T., Rozenberg, J., Adrien, V.S. and Narloch, U. 2015. Shock Waves: Managing the impacts of climate change on Poverty. World Bank Publications. Grüneberg W.J., D. Ma, R.O.M. Mwanga, E.E. Carey, K. Huamani, F. Diaz, R. Eyzaguirre, E. Guaf, M. Jusuf, A. Karuniawan, K. Tjintokohadi, Y.-S. Song, S.R. Anil, M. Hossain, E. Rahaman, S.I. Attaluri, K. Somé, S.O. Afuape, K. Adofo, E. Lukonge, L. Karanja, J. Ndirigwe, G. Ssemakula, S. Agili, J.M. Randrianaivoarivony, M. Chiona, F. Chipungu, S.M. Laurie, J. Ricardo, M. Andrade, F. Rausch Fernandes, A.S. Mello, M.A. Khan, D.R. Labonte, and G.C. Yencho. 2015. Advances in sweetpotato breeding from 1992 to 2012. In: Potato and Sweetpotato in Africa – Transforming the Value Chains for Food and Nutrition Security (Low J., M. Nyongesa, S. Quinn, and M. Parker, eds., CAB International, pp. 3-68. Heider, B., Romero, E., and De Haan, S. 2013. Field Screening of Variation for Heat Tolerance in a Large Set of Sweetpotato Germplasm Accessions. Poster presentation Tropentag conference "Agricultural development within the rural-urban continuum", September 17 - 19, Stuttgart-Hohenheim, Germany. 150 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B Hijmans, R.J., 2003. The effect of climate change on global potato production. American Journal of Potato Research, 80(4), pp.271-279.Hyman G, Hodson D, Jones P. 2013. Spatial analysis to support geographic targeting of genotypes to environments. Frontiers in Physiology 4:40. doi:10.3389/fphys.2013.00040. Jarvis, A., Ramirez-Villegas, J., Campo, B.V.H. and Navarro-Racines, C. 2012. Is cassava the answer to African climate change adaptation? Tropical Plant Biology, 5(1), pp.9-29. Khan, M.A., Saravia, D., Munive, S., Lozano, F., Farfan, E., Eyzaguirre, R. and Bonierbale, M. 2015. Multiple QTLs Linked to Agro-Morphological and Physiological Traits Related to Drought Tolerance in Potato. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter, 33(5), pp.1286-1298. Kirscht, H. unpublished Gender Trait Preferences in Cassava production in south-east and south-east Nigeria. IITA Kissel, E., van Asten, P., Swennen, R., Lorenzen, J. and Carpentier, S.C. 2015. Transpiration efficiency versus growth: Exploring the banana biodiversity for drought tolerance. Scientia Horticulturae 185:175-182. Kroschel, J., Sporleder, M., Tonnang, H.E.Z., Juarez, H., Carhuapoma, P., Gonzales, J.C. and Simon, R., 2013. Predicting climate-change-caused changes in global temperature on potato tuber moth Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller) distribution and abundance using phenology modeling and GIS mapping. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 170, pp.228-241. Labarta, R.A.2013. Possibilities and opportunities for enhancing the availability of high quality seed potato in Ethiopia: Lessons from the successful 3G project in Kenya. In: Woldegiorgis, G.; Schulz, S.; Berihun, B. (eds.). Seed potato tuber production and dissemination, experiences, challenges and prospects: Proceedings. National Workshop on Seed Potato Tuber Production and Dissemination. Bahir Dar (Ethiopia). 12-14 Mar 2012. (Ethiopia). Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR); Amhara Regional Agricultural Research Institute (ARARI); International Potato Center (CIP). ISBN 978-99944-53-87-x. pp. 21-34. Labarta, R. 2015. The effectiveness of potato and sweetpotato improvement programmes from the perspectives of varietal output and adoption in Sub-Saharan Africa. In: Walker, T.S. Alwang, J. (eds). Crop improvement, adoption and impact of improved varieties in food crops in Sub-Saharan Africa. Croydon (UK). CAB International. ISBN 978- 1-78064-401-1. pp. 164-182. Ly, D., Hamblin, M., Rabbi, I., Melaku, G., Bakare, M., Gauch, H. G., Okechukwu, R., Dixon, A.G.O., Kulakow, P., & Jannink, J. L. (2013). Relatedness and Genotype × Environment Interaction Affect Prediction Accuracies in Genomic Selection: A Study in Cassava. Crop Science, 53(4), 1312-1325. Machovina, B. and Feeley, K.J. 2013. Climate change driven shifts in the extent and location of areas suitable for export banana production. Ecological Economics, 95, pp.83-95. Mayanja, S, Mudege, N.N, Naziri, D. 2016.Gender situational analysis of the potato value chain and strategies for gender equity in post-harvest innovations. The case of eastern Uganda. Technical report to CRP Root Tubers and Bananas Mudege, N.N. (unpublished) Orange fleshed sweetpotato trait preferences among farmers in Chikwawa and Phalombe in Malawi: Implications for Breeding Mudege Mudege, N., Kapalasa, E., Chevo, T., Nyekanyeka,T Demo P. 2015: Gender norms and marketing of seed and ware potato in Ntcheu and Dedza in Malawi. Journal of Gender Agriculture and Food Security Vol 1, Issue 2, pp 18-41, 2015. http://www.agrigender.net/views/marketing-of-seeds-and-ware-potatoes-in-Malawi-JGAFS-122015-2.php Mudege, N.N. Mwanga, R.O.M., Chevo, T., and Abidin, E. (unpublished) Analysis of sweetpotato vine multiplication in Phalombe and Chikwawa in Malawi: Implications for gender and agroecology and sustainability. Mudege, N.N., Mayanja, S., & Naziri, D. (2016) Gender situational analysis of the potato value chain and strategies for gender equity in post-harvest innovations: The case of western Uganda. Technical Report. CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB) and International Potato Center (CIP). Ortiz, R. and Swennen, R. 2014. From crossbreeding to biotechnology-facilitated improvement of banana and plantain. Biotechnology Advances 32(1):158-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2013.09.010 Paris TR, Manzanilla D, Tatlonghari G, Labios R, Cueno A, Villanueva D. 2011. Guide to participatory varietal selection for submergence-tolerant rice. Los Baños (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. 111p. 151 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B Rabbi, I.Y., Kulakow, P.A., Manu-Aduening, J.A., Dankyi, A.A., Asibuo, J.Y., Parkes, E.Y., Abdoulaye, T., Girma, G., Gedil, M.A., Ramu, P. and Reyes, B. 2015. Tracking crop varieties using genotyping-by-sequencing markers: a case study using cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). BMC genetics, 16(1), p.115. Rabbi, I; Hamblin, M.; Gedil, M.; Kulakow, P.; Ferguson, M.; Ikpan, A. S.; Ly, D.; Jannink, J.-L. 2014. Genetic Mapping Using Genotyping-by-Sequencing in the Clonally Propagated Cassava. Crop Science, 54(4): 1384-1396. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2013.07.0482 Ramirez, J., Jarvis, A., Van den Bergh, I., Staver, C. and Turner, D.W. 2011. Changing Climates: Effects on Growing Conditions for Banana and Plantain (Musa spp.) and Possible Responses. p. 426-438. In: Yadav, S.S., Redden, R.J., Hatfield, J.L., Lotze-Campen, H. and Hall, A.E. (eds.). Crop Adaptation to Climate Change. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford (GBR). http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470960929.ch29 RTB. 2014. How to Conduct Participatory Varietal Selection in Potato: A Gender Responsive User Guide - See more at: http://www.rtb.cgiar.org/strong-new-gender-focus-in-revised-manual-on-participatory-varietal- selection/#sthash.DDaleqoL.dpuf Schulte-Geldermann, E., Gildemacher, P.R. and Struik, P.C. 2015. Improving Seed Health and Seed Performance by Positive Selection in Three Kenyan Potato Varieties. In: Potato and Sweetpotato in Africa: Transforming the Value Chains for Food and Nutrition Security: ISBN 9781780644202, DOI 10.1079/9781780644202.0000, p. 254-260 Srivastava, A.K., Gaiser, T., Paeth, H. and Ewert, F. 2012. The impact of climate change on Yam (Dioscorea alata) yield in the savanna zone of West Africa. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 153, pp.57-64. Sparks, A.H., Forbes, G.A., Hijmans, R.J. and Garrett, K.A. 2014. Climate change may have limited effect on global risk of potato late blight. Global change biology, 20(12), pp.3621-3631. Tecle, I. Y., J. Edwards, N. Menda, C. Egesi, I. Y. Rabbi, P. Kulakow, R. Kawuki, J-L Jannink, L. A. Mueller. 2014. solGS: a web-based tool for genomic selection. BMC Bioinformatics 15(1):398. Thomas-Sharma, S., A. Abdurahman, S. Ali, J. L. Andrade-Piedra, S. Bao, A. O. Charkowski, D. Crook, M. Kadian, P. Kromann, P. C. Struik, L. Torrance, K. A. Garrett and G. A. Forbes. 2015. Seed degeneration in potato: the need for an integrated seed health strategy to mitigate the problem in developing countries. Plant Pathology, accepted online, DOI: 10.1111/ppa.1243. Tushemereirwe, W., Batte, M., Nyine, M., Tumuhimbise, R., Barekye, A., Tendo, S., Talengera, D., Kubiriba, J., Lorenzen, J., Swennen, R. and Uwimana, B. 2015. Performance of NARITA banana hybrids in the preliminary yield trial for three cycles in Uganda. IITA, NARO, Uganda. 35p. Van den Bergh, I., Ramirez, J., Staver, C., Turner, D.W. and Brown, D. 2012. Climate change in the subtropics: the impacts of projected averages and variability on banana productivity. p.89-99. In: Wuensche, J.N., Albrigo, L.G., Gubbuk, H., Reinhardt, D.H., Staver, C. and Van den Bergh, I. (eds.). Proceedings of XXVIII International Horticultural Congress on Science and Horticulture for People (IHC2010): International Symposium on Citrus, Bananas and other Tropical Fruits under Subtropical Conditions, Lisbon, Portugal, 22-27/08/2010. Acta Horticulturae 928. ISHS, Leuven, Belgium. http://www.actahort.org/books/928/928_9.htm van Etten, J. 2011. Crowdsourcing Crop Improvement in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Proposal for a Scalable and Inclusive Approach to Food Security. IDS Bulletin, 42: 102–110. doi: 10.1111/j.1759-5436.2011.00240.x Vanhove, A., Vermaelen, W., Panis, B., Swennen, R., Carpentier, S. 2012. Screening the banana biodiversity for drought tolerance: can an in vitro growth model and proteomics be used as a tool to discover tolerant varieties and understand homeostasis. Frontiers in Plant Science, 3, art.nr. 176. Zivy, M., Wienkoop, S., Renaut, J., Pinheiro, C., Goulas, E., Carpentier, S. 2015. The quest for tolerant varieties: the importance of integrating "omics" techniques to phenotyping. Frontiers in Plant Science, 6, art.nr. 448. FP3: RESILIENT RTB CROPS Alvarez, E., Pardo, J.M., Mejía, J.F., Bertaccini A., Thanh, H.D, and Hoat, T.X. 2013. Detection and Identification of a 16SrI Group Phytoplasma associated with Witches Broom Disease of Cassava in Vietnam. Phytopathogenic Mollicutes 3(2): 77-81 152 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B Blomme, G., Jacobsen, K., Ocimati, W., Beed, F., Ntamwira, J., Sivirihauma, C., Ssekiwoko, F., Nakato, V., Kubiriba, J., Tripathi, L., Tinzaara, W., Mbolela, F., Lutete, L., and Karamura, E. (2014). Fine-tuning banana Xanthomonas wilt control options over the past decade in East and Central Africa. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 1– 17. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10658-014-0402-0 Challinor, A.J., Koehler, A.-K., Ramirez-Villegas, J., Whitfield, S., and Das, B. 2016. Current warming will reduce yields unless maize breeding and seed systems adapt immediately. Nature Climate Change (in press). Challinor, A.J., Watson, J., Lobell, D.B., Howden, S.M., Smith, D.R., Chhetri, N., 2014. A meta-analysis of crop yield under climate change and adaptation. Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 287–291. FAO. 2008. Climate-related transboundary pests and diseases. http://www.fao.org/3/a-ai785e.pdf Hodgetts J, Karamura G, Johnson G, Hall J, Perkins K, Beed F, Nakato V, Grant M, Studholme DJ, Boonham N and Smith J (2014). Development of a lateral flow device for in-field detection and evaluation of PCR based diagnostic methods for Xanthomonas campestris pathovar musacearum, the causal agent of Banana Xanthomonas Wilt. Plant Pathology, DOI:10.1111/ppa.12289 Jarvis A, Ramirez-Villegas J, Campo BVH, Navarro-Racines C. 2012. Is cassava the answer to African climate change adaptation? Tropical Plant Biology 5(1), 9-29. Köberl, M., Dita, M., Martinuz, A., Staver, C., & Berg, G. 2015. Agroforestry leads to shifts within the gammaproteobacterial microbiome of banana plants cultivated in Central America. Frontiers in Microbiology, 6(February), 1–10. http://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.00091 Kroschel J., M. Sporleder, H.E.Z. Tonnang, H. Juarez, P. Carhuapoma, J.C. Gonzales, R. Simon. 2013. Predicting climate change caused changes in global temperature on potato tuber moth Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller) distribution and abundance using phenology modeling and GIS mapping. Journal of Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 170: 228-241. Kroschel J., N. Mujica, P. Carhuapoma, M. Sporleder. 2016. Pest Distribution and Risk Atlas for Africa- Potential global and regional distribution and abundance of agricultural and horticultural pests and associated biocontrol agents under current and future climates. International Potato Center (CIP), Lima, Peru, 650pp (forthcoming). Kroschel, J., M. Sporleder, H.E.Z. Tonnang, H. Juarez, P. Carhuapoma, J.C. Gonzales and R. Simon. 2013. Predicting climate change caused changes in global temperature on potato tuber moth Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller) distribution and abundance using phenology modeling and GIS mapping. Journal of Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 170, 228-241. Kroschel, J., N. Mujica, J. Alcazar, V. Canedo and O. Zegarra. 2012. Developing integrated pest management for potato: Experiences and lessons from two distinct potato production systems of Peru. In: Sustainable Potato Production: Global Case Studies (Zhongqi He, R.P. Larkin, C.W. Honeycutt, Eds.). Springer. UK, 419-450. Kumar, P. L., Selvarajan, R., Iskra-Caruana, M.-L., Chabannes, M., & Hanna, R. 2015. Control of Plant Virus Diseases - Vegetatively-Propagated Crops. Advances in Virus Research 91. Elsevier. http://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aivir.2014.10.006 Legg, J.P., Lava Kumar, P., Makeshkumar, T., Ferguson, M., Kanju, E., Ntawuruhunga, P., Tripathi, L. and Cuellar, W. 2015. Cassava virus diseases: biology, epidemiology and management. Advances in Virus Research 91, 85-142. DOI: 10.1016/bs.aivir.2014.10.001 Mollot G, Duyck P-F, Lefeuvre P, Lescourret F, Martin J-F, Piry S, et al. 2014. Cover Cropping Alters the Diet of Arthropods in a Banana Plantation: A Meta-barcoding Approach. PLoS ONE 9(4): e93740. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093740 Mujica N., P. Carhuapoma, and J. Kroschel. 2016. The serpentine leafminer fly, Liriomyza huidobrensis. In: J. Kroschel, N. Mujica, P. Carhuapoma, M. Sporleder (eds.): Pest Distribution and Risk Atlas for Africa: Potential global and regional distribution and abundance of agricultural and horticultural pests and associated biocontrol agents under current and future climates. CIP, Lima, Peru (forthcoming). Norton, G.W., E.A. Heinrichs, G.C. Luther, and M.E. Irwin. 2005. Globalizing integrated pest management: a participatory research process. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. Oerke, E.C., 2006. Crop losses to pests. J. Agric. Sci. 144, 31–43. 153 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B Parsa, S., Hazzi, N. a., Chen, Q., Lu, F., Herrera Campo, B. V., Yaninek, J. S., & Vásquez-Ordóñez, A. A. 2014. Potential geographic distribution of two invasive cassava green mites. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 65(2), 195– 204. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-014-9868-x Parsa, S., Kondo, T., & Winotai, A. 2012. The Cassava Mealybug (Phenacoccus manihoti) in Asia: First Records, Potential Distribution, and an Identification Key. PLoS ONE, 7(10). http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047675 Patil, B. L., Legg, J. P., Kanju, E., & Fauquet, C. M. 2015. Cassava brown streak disease: a threat to food security in Africa. Journal of General Virology, 96, 956–968. http://doi.org/10.1099/vir.0.000014 Tripathi L, Mwangi M, Abele S, Aritua V, Tushemereirwe WT and Bandyopadhyay R. 2009. Xanthomonas wilt: A threat to banana production in East and Central Africa. Plant Disease 93, 440-451. Tripathi, L., Tripathi, J. N., Kiggundu, A., Korie, S., Shotkoski, F., & Tushemereirwe, W. K. 2014. Field trial of Xanthomonas wilt disease-resistant bananas in East Africa. Nature Biotechnology, 32(9), 868–870. http://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3007 Zeddies J, Schaab RP, Neuenschwander P and Herren HR. 2001. Economics of biological control of cassava mealybug in Africa. Agricultural Economics 24, 209-219. FP4: NUTRITIOUS FOOD AND VALUE ADDED THROUGH POST HARVEST INNOVATION Bach, V., Kidmose U., Bjørn G.K. and Edelenbos M. 2012. Effects of harvest time and variety on sensory quality and chemical composition of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) tubers. Food Chemistry 133:82-89. Belalcazar J., Dufour D., Pizarro M., Luna J., Londoño L., Morante N., Calle F., Jaramillo A., Pino L., Davrieux F., Becerra, L.A., Ceballos H. 2016. High-throughput phenotyping and improvements in breeding cassava for increased carotenoids in the roots. Crop Science, Manuscript ID CROP-2015-11-0701-ORA.R1 accepted. https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/cs Ceballos, H.; Morante, N.; Sanchez, T.; Ortiz, D.; Aragon, I.; Chavez, A.L.; Pizarro, M.; Calle, F.; Dufour, D. 2013. Rapid Cycling Recurrent Selection for Increased Carotenoids Content in Cassava Roots. Crop Science 53 (6): 2342- 2351. Cole, Donald C, Carol Levin, Cornelia Loechl, Graham Thiele, Frederick Grant, Aimee Webb Girard, Kirimi Sindi, Jan Low (2016) Planning an integrated agriculture and health program and designing its evaluation: experience from western Kenya. Evaluation and Program Planning. Davrieux F., Dufour D., Dardenne P., Belalcazar J., Pizarro M., Luna J., Londoño L., Jaramillo A., Sanchez T., Morante N., Calle F., Becerra L.A., Ceballos H. 2016. LOCAL regression algorithm improves NIRS predictions when the target constituent evolves in breeding populations. JNIRS—Journal of Near Infrared Spectroscopy, Virtual Issue NIR-2015 (accepted). Devaux A.; Horton, D. , Velasco, C.; Thiele, G.; Lopez G.; Bernet, T.; Reinoss, I.; Ordinola, M. 2009. Collective action for market chain innovations in the Andes. Food Policy 34: 31-38. FAO. 2015. The State of Food Insecurity in the World. Rome: FAO. Gil A., Martinez de Victoria E., and Olza J. 2015. Indicators for the evaluation of diet quality. Nutr Hosp. 31 (Supl.3): 128-144. Golzarand M, Mirmiran P, Jessri M, Toolabi K, Mojarrad M, Azizi F. 2012. Dietary trends in the Middle East and North Africa: an ecological study (1961 to 2007). Public Health Nutr. 15: 1835–1844. Hansupalak N., Piromkraipak P., Tamthirat P., Manitsorasak A., Sriroth K., Tran T. (2015). Biogas reduces the carbon footprint of cassava starch: A comparative assessment with fuel oil. Journal of Cleaner Production. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.138. I.F. 3.844 Herforth, A. Lidder, P. and Gill, M. 2015. Strengthening the links between nutrition and health outcomes and agricultural research. Food Sec. 7:457–461 DOI 10.1007/s12571-015-0451-z IFPRI (2015). Global Nutrition Report 2015: Actions and accountability to advance nutrition and sustainable development. Washington, DC: IFPRI. Maldonado Alvarado P., Grosmaire L., Dufour D., Giraldo Toro A., Sanchez T., Calle F., Moreno Santander A.M., Ceballos H., Delarbre J.L., Tran T. 2013. Combined effect of fermentation, sun-drying and genotype on breadmaking ability of sour cassava starch. Carbohydrate Polymers, 98(1), 1137-1146. 154 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2013.07.012 Maziya-Dixon B., Awoyale W., Dixon A. 2015. Effect of Processing on the Retention of Total Carotenoid, Iron and Zinc Contents of Yellow-fleshed Cassava Roots. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research. Vol. 3, No. 8, 2015, pp 483-488. http://pubs.sciepub.com/jfnr/3/8/2 Morante N., Ceballos H., Sánchez T., Rolland-Sabaté A., Calle F., Hershey C., Gibert O., Dufour D. 2016. Discovery of new spontaneous sources of amylose-free cassava starch and analysis of their structure and techno-functional properties. Food Hydrocolloids, (56), 383–395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2015.12.025 Okike I., Samireddypalle A., Kaptoge L., Fauquet C., Atehnkeng J., Bandyopadhyay R., Kulakow P., Duncan A., Alabi T., Blummel M. 2015. Technical innovations for small-scale producers and households to process wet cassava peels into high quality animal feed ingredients and aflasafe™ substrate. Food Chain 5(1-2), 71-90. Otegbayo, B., Bokanga, M., & Asiedu, R. 2011. Physicochemical properties of yam starch: Effect on textural quality of yam food product (pounded yam). Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment, 9(1), 145-150. Porter, J.R., L. Xie, A.J. Challinor, K. Cochrane, S.M. Howden, M.M. Iqbal, D.B. Lobell, and M.I. Travasso. 2014: Food security and food production systems. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 485-533. Precoppe M., Chapuis A., Müller J., Abass A. 2015. Tunnel dryer and flash dryer performance evaluation to improve small-scale cassava processing in Tanzania. Journal of Food Process Engineering. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfpe.12274 Rodriguez-Amaya, D.B. 2001. A Guide to Carotenoid Analysis in Foods. ILSI Human Nutrition Institute. ILSI Press, Washington DC. Rolland-Sabaté A., Sánchez T., Buléon A., Colonna P., Jaillais B., Ceballos H., Dufour D. (2012). Structural characterization of novel cassava starches with low and high amylose contents in comparison with other commercial sources. Food hydrocolloids, 27(1), 161-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2011.07.008 Sánchez T., Ceballos H., Dufour D., Ortiz D., Morante N., Calle F., Zum Felde T., Domínguez M., Davrieux F. (2014). Carotenoids and dry matter prediction by NIRS and Hunter color in fresh cassava roots. Food Chemistry (151), 444–451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.11.081 Sánchez T., Dufour D., Moreno I. X., Ceballos H. 2010. Comparison of Pasting and Gel Stabilities of Waxy and Normal Starches from Potato, Maize, and Rice with Those of a Novel Waxy Cassava Starch under Thermal, Chemical, and Mechanical Stress. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry, 58, 5093–5099. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf1001606 Stathers, T., Low, J.W., Carey, E., Mwanga, R.O.M., Tumwegamire, S., Malinga, J., Andrade, M. 2013. Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Sweetpotato: Reaching Agents of Change ToT Training Manual. Nairobi: International Potato Center. http://cipotato.org/resources/publications/manual/everything-you-ever- wanted-to-know-about-sweetpotato-reaching-agents-of-change-tot-training-manual-volume- 1/#sthash.ggfVJ3vT.dpuf Stoian, D., Donovan, J., Fisk, J. & Muldoon, M. 2015. Value Chain Development for Rural Poverty Reduction: A Reality Check and a Warning. In: Jones, L. (ed.): Financial and Market Integration of Vulnerable People: Lessons from Development Programmes. Practical Action Publishing, Rugby, UK, pp. 71–85. The Economist. 2015. Special Report: Nigeria’s Chance. June 20th-26th, 2015 edition. Tran T., Da G., Moreno-Santander M.A., Velez-Hernandez G.A., Giraldo-Toro A., Piyachomkwan K., Sriroth K., Dufour D. 2015. A comparison of energy use, water use and carbon footprint of cassava starch production in Thailand, Vietnam and Colombia. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 100, 31-40. I.F. 3.026 UNEP: United Nations Environment Programme. 2007. Global Environment Outlook GEO4: Environment for Development. Nairobi: UNEP. Vandevijvere S., Monteiro C., Krebs-Smith S.M., Lee A., Swinburn B., Kelly B., Neal B., Snowdon W., and Sacks G. 2013. Monitoring and benchmarking population diet quality globally: a step-wise approach. Obesity reviews 14 (Suppl. 1), 135–149. 155 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B FP5: IMPROVED LIVELIHOODS AT SCALE Alene, A.D., Abdoulaye, T., Rusike, J., Manyong, V., and Walker, T. 2015. “The Effectiveness of Crop Improvement Programs from the Perspectives of Varietal Output and Adoption: Cassava, Cowpea, Soybean, and Yam in Sub- Saharan Africa and Maize in West and Central Africa”. In: Walker, T.S. and Alwang, J.R. (editors), 2015. Crop Improvement, Adoption, and Impact of Improved Varieties in Food Crops in Sub-Saharan Africa, CABI book. Bellon M. R., Gotor E., Caracciolo F. 2015. Assessing the effectiveness of projects supporting on-farm conservation of native crops: evidence from the High Andes of South America. World Development. doi:10.1016/j. worlddev.2015.01.014. http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0305750X15000157 Berthet, E.T.A., Barnaud, C., Girard, N., Labatut, J. and Martin, G. 2016. How to foster agroecological innovations? A comparison of participatory design methods. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 59, 280– 301. Dror, I., Cadilhon, J.J., Schut, M., Misiko, M. and Maheshwari, S. 2016. Innovation platforms for agricultural development: Evaluating the mature innovation platforms landscape. UK: Routledge. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/68755 Frelat, R., Lopez-Ridaura, S., Giller, K.E., Herrero, M. Douxchamps, S., Andersson Djurfeldt, A., Erensteinb, O., Henderson, B., Kassie, M., Paul, B.K., Rigolotd, C., Ritzema, R., Rodriguez, D., van Asten, P.J.A., van Wijk, M.T., 2015. Drivers of household food availability in sub-Saharan Africa based on big data from small farms. PNAS www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10. 1073/pnas.1518384112. Fuglie, K., and G. Thiele. 2009. Research Priority Assessment at the International Potato Center (CIP). Prioritizing Agricultural Research for Development. D. A. Raitzer and G. W. Norton, CABI: 25-43. Gray, D. and T. Vander Wal. 2012. The connected company. Sebastopol: O'Reilly Media. Jalbert, K & A.J. Kinchy. 2015, Sense and Influence: Environmental Monitoring Tools and the Power of Citizen Science, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, DOI: 10.1080/1523908X.2015.1100985 Klerkx, L. & Leeuwis, C. 2009. Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: Insights from the Dutch agricultural sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 76(6): 849-860. Labarta, R. 2015. The Effectiveness of Potato and Sweetpotato Improvement Programs from the Perspectives of Varietal Output and Adoption in Sub---Saharan Africa. In: Walker, T.S. and Alwang, J.R. (editors), (2015). Crop Improvement, Adoption, and Impact of Improved Varieties in Food Crops in Sub-Saharan Africa, CABI book. Lamb, J.N., Moore, K.M., Norton, J., Omondi, E.C., Laker-Ojok, R., Sikuku, D.N., Ashilenje, D.S. and Odera, J. 2016. A social networks approach for strengthening participation in technology innovation: lessons learnt from the Mount Elgon region of Kenya and Uganda. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 14, 65–81. Gottschick, Manuel. 2013. Reflexive Capacity in Local Networks for Sustainable Development: Integrating Conflict and Understanding into a Multi-Level Perspective Transition Framework. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning Mudege, N.N., Tafadzwa Chevo, Ted Nyekanyeka, Eliya Kapalasa and Paul Demo. 2015. Gender Norms and Access to Extension Services and Training among Potato Farmers in Dedza and Ntcheu in Malawi. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, DOI:10.1080/1389224X.2015.1038282 Muhammad, L.W., Maina, I.N., Pelletier, B. and Hickey, G.M. 2016. A participatory and integrated agricultural extension approach to enhancing farm resilience through innovation and gender equity. pp 17–43. In: Brownhill, L., Njuguna, E.M., Bothi, L.K., Pelletier, B., Muhammad, L.W. and Hickey, G.M. (Eds.). Food Security, Gender and Resilience: Improving Smallholder and Subsistence Farming. Taylor and Francis Group, London (UK). Rabbi, I., M. Hamblin, M. Gedil, P. Kulakow, M. Ferguson, A.S. Ikpan, D. Ly, and J.-L. Jannink. 2014. Genetic mapping using genotyping-by-sequencing in the clonally propagated cassava. Crop Science 54:1–13. doi:10.2135/cropsci2013.07.0482 Schut, M., Klerkx, L., Rodenburg, J., Kayeke, J., Raboanarielina, C., Hinnou, L. C., Adegbola, P. Y., van Ast, A. & Bastiaans, L. 2015. RAAIS: Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems (Part I). A diagnostic tool for integrated analysis of complex problems and innovation capacity. Agricultural Systems 132: 1-11. Shaffer, P. 2013. Q-Squared: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches in Poverty Analysis. Oxford Scholarship Online van Asten, P.J.A., van der Wolf, J., van Campenhout, B, Ainembabazi, J.H., Pali, P., Schulte-Geldermann, E. 2015. Understanding the diversity of Irish potato smallholder systems in Southwest Uganda. PASIC project (www.pasic.ug), unpublished 156 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 B Van Etten, J., Steinke, J., van de Gevel, J., Mathur, P., Fadda, C., Mittra, S., Calderer, L., Rosas Sotomayor, J-C., Mercado, L., Suchini, J-G., Beza, E., Gupta, A., van Duijvendijk, K., Zimmerer, K., Fantahun, B., Kassahun Mengistu, D., Gebrehawaryat Kidane, Y., Kiambi, D., Mollel, M. 2016. First experiences with a novel citizen science approach: crowdsourcing farmers' observations and preferences through on-farm triadic comparisons of technologies (tricot). Vanlauwe, B., Coyne, D., Gockowski, J., Hauser, S., Huising, J., Masso, C., Nziguheba, G., Schut M. and Van Asten, P. 2014. Sustainable intensification and the African smallholder farmer. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 8, 15–22. 157 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 C ANNEX 10 C: RTB Communications and Knowledge Management Communication and knowledge management tools and approaches will be integrated across the program and serve two primary functions: promoting the program externally to raise its visibility and increase accountability among key stakeholders, and supporting the achievement of research and development impact at the Flagship Project (FP) level. This documents describes the program’s approach to communication and knowledge management in Phase II, building on channels and products developed in Phase I. 1. Program and FP level communications objectives At the program level, communications aims to achieve the following objectives: • Highlight the program’s contributions towards achieving the CGIAR Strategy and Results Framework 2022 targets, and alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals to demonstrate accountability. • Promote RTB’s scientific progress, process and results – emphasizing the unique potential of root, tuber and banana crops to reduce poverty, improve livelihoods and food and nutrition security – to key audiences. • Promote a positive image of root, tuber and banana crops in donor and program countries and position them as key crops for future investment and research based on their nutritional qualities and climate resilience to bring about a higher level of media, public and political support. • Position RTB as a thought leader, and leading authority on knowledge and research about root, tuber and banana crops. • Disseminate RTB scientific results to key audiences through tailored communication products and channels, including making program publications, documents and knowledge products including databases visible and accessible as per the CGIAR Open Access Policy (see 1.13). • Foster a strong program team through effective internal communication, including developing and supporting knowledge sharing platforms, processes and exercises for program partners, FPs and communities of practice. At the FP level, communications tools and approaches will be utilized to help achieve specific objectives across the program’s five FPs. Communications will (1) support the delivery, uptake and adoption of knowledge, practices and/or technologies by stakeholders specific to each cluster; (2) support policy influence through generating evidence-based products and facilitating dialogues with decision makers at local, national and regional levels; (3) support knowledge sharing and learning mechanisms to connect partners and/or stakeholders and strengthen RTB research. 2. Audiences Primary audiences include (1) national level policymakers; (2) program donors including governmental organizations, foundations and the private sector; (3) partners including National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), private sector and advanced research institutes; (4) RTB Program Participants and other CGIAR centers and Research Programs; (5) regional and international media; (6) the general public interested in issues of food security. Secondary audiences for 158 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 C the program, who are influenced by primary audiences and thereby contribute to achieving our communication goals include stakeholders in program countries, such as extension workers, farmer’s associations and farmers. These audiences of key stakeholders are identified in the program’s impact pathway and theory of change (see 1.3), and partnerships and comparative advantage strategy (see 1.8). 3. Key messages Key messages that articulate and synthesize the program narrative will be revised in Phase II together with FP leaders, the Management Committee, Independent Steering Committee and the PMU, and embedded throughout internal and external communication products. 4. Activities Key program level communications activities will include: • Utilize and/or manage international events and conferences (e.g. WCRTC, GCARD3, ISHS-ProMusa symposia) to raise awareness and strengthen the position of RTB as a thought leader, as well as to support and strengthen RTB’s connection with networks of root, tuber and banana research and development professionals, and engage in policy dialogue among other objectives. • Produce communication products that demonstrate the program’s scientific process, progress and success, such as success stories, case studies, briefs, infographics, blogs and annual reports. • Continue to promote and share program information, communication and knowledge products through channels including the website, social media (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, LinkedIn), SlideShare and the quarterly e-newsletter. • Update and maintain the RTB website1 as the online hub for the program to make RTB documents, information, and Open Access (OA) publications and databases accessible and visible. • Support RTB Open Access initiatives through (1) integrating the RTB OA Portal in to the RTB website; (2) drafting and disseminating OA guidelines and processes; (3) conducting an audit of current RTB publications in CGSpace and updating metadata and acknowledgements as required. • Media engagement at regional and international levels to support key objectives including positioning RTB as a thought leader, improving the image of RTB crops as key crops for future investment and research, and promoting the program’s results. • Improve internal communications through activities including (1) developing and socializing foundational documents such as Branding guidelines, Publication and Acknowledgements Guidelines and a Message Guide; (2) regular RTB-wide email communication and announcements from the Program Management Unit (PMU) and Program Director; and (3) convening program events and meetings including the RTB Annual Meeting. • Integrate outcome story information collection in to the program’s Planning, Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Platform (PMELP) for more efficient gathering of success stories. 1 The RTB website has received more than 114,000 unique pageviews and 43,000 unique visitors since it was launched in January 2013. 159 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 C • Knowledge and learning in communications will be shared with other CRPs via participation in the CGIAR KMC4CRPs online group and events, and the CGIAR Communications Community of Practice. • Highlight RTB’s participation in and contribution to the cross CRP gender initiative, GENNOVATE, via blogs and content for the Gender Network website. • Contribute blogs that share learning from RTB’s research process, progress and/or results for partner websites including CGIAR.org, and the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems’ Thrive Blog - a platform for critical discussion among researchers, academics and development professionals. • Update and monitor RTB branding to ensure a consistent and visible program profile. FP level communication activities will include: • Communicating evidence of efficacy of research, technologies and/or practices through products including policy briefs to influence policy change at national or district levels. • Support and promote existing knowledge sharing portals from Phase I, including the Sweetpotato Knowledge Portal and the ProMusa knowledge sharing platform (including its Musapedia knowledge compendium, Musalit bibliographic database, and Musacontacts contact database), which connect partners and stakeholders to enable sharing of learning, knowledge and resources between users. • Support the development of new online community platforms including the RTB-University Gender Integration Partnership platform, the RTB Breeding Community of Practice housed under Flagship Project 1 (FP1), and the Seed Systems Community of Practitioners under Flagship Project 2. • Marketing and branding campaigns for quality root, tuber and banana varieties and seed to promote consumer adoption of high quality varieties and seed. • Facilitate, promote and document workshops and events. • Support the uptake of new technologies and/or practices through generation of tailored knowledge products such as farmer-to-farmer training videos, training manuals and media engagement with local press such as TV and community radio. • Produce knowledge products on regulatory requirements for non-conventional breeding to be disseminated to NARS and breeders, under FP1. 5.0 Open Access RTB will implement a harvesting interface which will use metadata to harvest and index RTB knowledge products from RTB Program Participants’ open access repositories. Communications, drawing on the resources of the Lead Center Open Access and Data Management team, will create a Publication and Acknowledgement Guidelines document to provide adequate information for Program Participants regarding metadata input for harvesting for Open Access databases (see 1.13). The guidelines will be disseminated to program partners and made visible on the RTB website. Compliance with the guidelines will be a contractual requirement for the Program Participants. The RTB website will host the RTB Open Access Portal making program knowledge products visible and accessible to key audiences, along with the 160 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 C RTB Open Access Toolkit, including policy documents, training videos, donor open access information and regularly updated Open Access publisher information. 6. Resources Adequate financial and human resources will be allocated to achieve the program’s communication goals at both the CRP and FP levels. The RTB communications specialist will coordinate the program’s communications efforts, working with consultants and interns, and communication focal points in the lead and partner centers, drawing on their capacities and sharing lessons learned to grow RTB communications. Additionally, the lead center will provide information technology, library and graphic design services, and support for RTB program communications and knowledge management will be included in lead center staff work plans to ensure ongoing commitment. Communications activities at the FP and cluster level will be implemented by FP and cluster teams, drawing on human resources in partner organizations, and contracting specialist agro-communications consultants and organizations (AgroInsight, Access Agriculture, Shamba Shape Up) where necessary. 7.0 Monitoring and evaluation Key performance indicators (KPI) for the program level communications will be identified to monitor, evaluate and improve the program’s communications activities, in conjunction with surveys for selected key audiences. An annual communications report containing achievements, lessons learned and KPI results for program level communications will be shared with RTB communication focal points to promote accountability, and knowledge sharing and learning for communications. In Phase I surveys were utilized to draw feedback on program level communications from stakeholders including RTB scientists, partners and communication focal points in partner centers. Surveys were also used to conduct a comprehensive, large-scale impact review of the ProMusa knowledge sharing platform in 2013. Surveys will be continued to be used in Phase II to understand how RTB communication products and channels are used and assess the needs of RTB audiences. Updates to the RTB website and in particular integration of the Open Access Portal will enable the monitoring of new data in Phase II, namely for publication downloads. KPIs will include, but are not limited to: • No. of media mentions • No. of publication downloads and citations • Social media engagement statistics • Website statistics, including no. of unique visitors, time on site and bounce rate • No. of newsletter subscribers, and open and click rates • Feedback from selected RTB key audiences, including partners and RTB scientists • Knowledge sharing platform indicators as developed by Bioversity International, including network liveliness, network connectivity, and network effects2. 2 Gotor E., Blundo-Canto G., Vezina A. (2015). The effectiveness of knowledge sharing: The case of ProMusa. Bioversity International series of Impact Assessment Briefs no. 15. Bioversity International, 6p. 161 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 D ANNEX 10 D: RTB Accountability Matrix - Caveats to address during development of CRP2 full proposals As set out in Annex 1 to the Final Guidance for the 2nd Call for Full Proposals, the collective portfolio submitted by the Centers/partners in response to this call for full proposals must be accompanied by a summary of how the 23 caveats raised in that annex by the respective stakeholders have been addressed. This annex sets out those caveats, grouped by the body putting forward the topic for added attention in the full proposals 1.1 Caveats expressed by the Joint Consortium Board/Centers/Fund Council Working Group, in its Memorandum to the Fund Council to express support for a ‘green light’ to move to full proposal development, dated 30 November 2015 Recognizing the advances already made in the re-submitted portfolio in the highly constrained time available, the full proposals submitted by 31 March 2016 for ISPC review must address to the satisfaction of the ISPC, and contributors, the points set out below, to strengthen further the rationale and coherence of the planned research agenda. Thereby delivering increased confidence that with funding from 2017 onwards, it has the capacity to deliver on SDGs in general and the Results Framework and CGIAR targets as set out in the SRF: No Item to address Relevant Summary of how the matters has been adequately addressed CRP(s) (Full Proposal sections are referenced) 1 Greater attention to discerning the role of regionally AFS 1. FP5 cluster CC5.2 Sustainable intensification and diversification focused yield-gap closing/ sustainable intensification programs; will “enable an understanding of options for sustainable research in the system, as distinct from and a genetic gain intensification and diversification involving RTB-related innovations complement to global public goods research in areas such platform) (FP2–FP4) for improved household income, dietary quality, and as crop breeding, livestock health, food policy, and ecosystem function and resilience”. Hence it builds on and others. integrates the global dimension which is referred to. This will particularly focus on site integration countries and the systems innovation fund will create a set of incentives to link sustainable intensification with the other FPs. 2. FP2 2 More clearly articulating the strength of the arguments Genebank; NA for maintaining genebanks and genetic gain as two Genetic gain separate platforms rather than an integrated effort1 platforms 3 Crosschecking that consolidation at the cluster of All 3. RTB management and governance opted to create a new FP5 activities or flagship level has not delivered unintended drawing on elements of the previous FP5 and FP6. This pooled a 1 There were a number of different views expressed during working group deliberations on this topic. Whilst there was no fundamental opposition to separate platforms, there was a call for making a much stronger case as to why they should be separate. 162 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 D No Item to address Relevant Summary of how the matters has been adequately addressed CRP(s) (Full Proposal sections are referenced) adverse consequences such as removing clarity for key critical mass of linked social science research and reduced research priorities and/or increasing transaction costs transaction costs. Place based clusters were dropped and “place based research” occurs now around site integration and with the new systems innovation fund. 4. RTB optimized management structure by reducing the total number of clusters and clarified the research priorities in each cluster by organizing the research agenda around key “products”. 4 Providing a clearer understanding of National Partners’ All This is clearly and exhaustively described in: requirements, and how the scientific and financial 5. Impact pathway figures for each FP, with different next users program elements support them including NARS, Plant health agencies, national universities and many others made explicit (e.g. Figure FP1.1) 6. Tables of Key partnerships (in partnership sub-section 8 in the CRP narrative and 7 in each FP) 7. CapDev and Partnership strategies (Annexes 1 and 2) 5 Setting out more clearly the interconnection and All 8. Connection with gender work in RTB is clarified in section 4 and 7 of resources available for the proposed Communities of CRP narrative: “Likewise, the cluster on gender-equitable Practice in gender/youth and capacity development, with development and youth employment in FP5 (CC5.3) will work particular attention to ensuring engagement of partners closely with the gender coordinating platform to share and in the respective Communities of Practice. Specifically, synthesize knowledge on how gender inequalities affect agri-food ensuring that the proposed communities of practice systems, and to understand the approaches and tools required to operate in a way that will result in meaningful progress improve equitable access to RTB innovations.” towards sustainable engagement and impact 9. Annex 6 describes in detail the linkages of RTB with the gender platform 10. In CapDev sections (sub-section 10 of CRP Narrative and each FP) 11. In CapDev Strategy (Annex 2) 12. Resources for collaboration form part of the budget for the cluster in FP5: Gender-equitable development and youth employment 6 Reducing as many transaction costs as possible, All 13. RTB will follow the principle of subsidiarity and complement rather particularly regarding management burden than duplicate center management and governance. 14. RTB already implemented recommended governance structure of single Independent Steering Committee to reduce transaction costs 163 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 D No Item to address Relevant Summary of how the matters has been adequately addressed CRP(s) (Full Proposal sections are referenced) 15. RTB will proactively analyze and seek ways to reduce transaction costs: o E.g. shared development of M&E system between CRP and program participants o Moving to five FPs with a reduction of total amount of clusters simplifies decision making and has already reduced transaction costs. 7 Providing greater emphasis on soils, animal genetic WLE, all 16. Stepwise approaches to intensify crop production such as conservation and the potential impact of big data across AFS, integrated soil fertility management matched with farm typologies the portfolio, not limited to genetic gain Livestock, and natural resource status is explicitly considered in FP5 CC5.2 Big Data Sustainable intensification and diversification. platform 17. Cross-cutting cluster (CC3.2) on crop production systems well- articulated with clusters in FP2, FP3 and FP5. CC3.2 research will focus on technologies for more productive and ecologically sustainable crop production systems 18. Annex 6 describes the linkages of RTB with the Big Data platform 164 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 D 1.2 Caveats expressed by the ISPC, dated 9 December 2015 ISPC comments on the portfolio (a paraphrase of a longer document) No Item to address Relevant Centers’ summary of how the matters has been adequately CRP(s) addressed Portfolio level 8 Seek explicit prioritization within CRPs (and also between CRPs); All 19. RTB explains its up-/downstream research mix and the balancing research on ‘upstream’ science with research on how changing nature of upstream science vs research on scaling to scale out and up relevant new knowledge and technologies as clusters move from piloting to scaling ( CRP narrative (while leaving the delivery of impact at scale to organizations sub-sections 2 and 3) and the use of W1&2 in budget with that remit) narratives for the CRP as well as each FP. 9 Important to capture synergies between CRPs so that the System All 20. Agree this is vitally important and a key function of W1&2 delivers more than the sum of the CRPs (the One System One (statement investment. RTB proposes a net increase in inter-CRP Portfolio mantra) of portfolio collaboration, much of which would depend on sufficient synthesis ‘coordination’ funding. required) 21. Cross CRP synergies are described in detail in tables in annex 6 which identifies the value added from collaboration. 22. Partnership tables in each FP show the capture of CRP synergies (sub-section 7) and CRP narrative (sub-section 8). 10 Clearer explanations of what W1&2 funding will be used for All 23. Described in budget narratives for CRP and for each FP 24. Additionally uplift budget is principally W1&2 so the outcomes associated with the uplift budget are principally attributable to W1&2 11 CRPs should not be expected to adhere to the ‘prioritization’ All 25. RTB conducted an extensive priority assessment which is undertaken in a very short time-frame to produce the ‘Refreshed’ described in the narrative. submission, but should hold serious discussion with their 26. RTB is completing a congruence analysis of the fit between partners on which activities to prioritize according to the investments and outcomes which will guide further principles which were agreed at FC14 decisions by RTB governance Platforms 12 2 new platforms are proposed: Genebanks and Genetic gains. Not NA The ISPC is comfortable with the platform on Genebanks applicable 165 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 D No Item to address Relevant Centers’ summary of how the matters has been adequately CRP(s) addressed 13 Have concerns about the focus of the proposed Genetic Gains Genetics NA and what the creation of such a platform will mean for the AFS Gain CRPs (and theories of change). The ISPC also found the title of platform ‘Genetic gains’ to be inappropriate as what is proposed is only part of the research required to deliver ‘genetic gains’. The budget needs to be reviewed 14 Supports the concept of an initiative in Big Data and does not Big Data NA want to see this de-emphasized platform 15 Identify where budget is placed for other arrangements to meet All c.f. NA cross cutting system work originally considered through Guidance Expressions of Interest at the pre-proposal stage doc AFS CRPs 16 DCLAS: The rationale for DCLAS receiving a ‘C’ rating overall (from This NA the ISPC) related to the breadth of species being considered; the addressed to funders are requested to indicate their priorities for this CRP funders not to CRPs 17 FTA has moved tenure and rights to PIM – although PIM don’t FTA, PIM, NA mention that. FTA also wants to move the restoration work to WLE WLE. Given the decreased budgets overall, these 2 CRPs may not accept these moves and the topics may hence disappear. Clarity on the potential loss of these areas is required 18 Livestock and FISH both wish to move some genetics research Livestock, NA across to the new platform as may other CRPs, yet the budget Fish, Genetic sources for those moves are not clear Gain platform 19 Maize propose to move some bilateral projects out of the CRP MAIZE NA due to budget cuts. What is an appropriate balance of W1/2 bilateral at the base funding scenario? 20 RAFS (and presumably other CRPs) proposes to reduce the RAFS, 27. Based on interaction with MELCoP, RTB has targeted a number of targeted IDOs and sub-IDOs – and both RAFS and WHEAT. limited number of sub-IDOs (and thus IDOs, SDGs), driven Wheat make reference to cutting back on capacity development by need for credibility, the differentiation between multi- 166 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 D No Item to address Relevant Centers’ summary of how the matters has been adequately CRP(s) addressed due to budget cuts. Realistic adjustments to current funding and CRP (portfolio) versus per-CRP impacts and by need for base scenario funding will need to be considered by CRPs and realism about capacity to monitor progress towards impact. funders 28. RTB proposed total yearly W1&2 Phase II budget is significantly lower than average for Phase I. Proposed uplift budget would restore to earlier level. But under base budget it’s clear that achievements linked to W1&2 need to be scaled back compared to the expectation two years ago with higher budgets. Global Integrating Programs 21 The ISPC is glad that PIM has agreed to take on the role of co- PIM re role NA ordination of a System-wide platform or Community of Practice of the FP on for gender work, although we hope that it will be possible to gender reinstate the original budget. It is hoped that down-rating gender from a Flagship to ‘Cross-cutting work’ does not reflect diminishing importance of gender 22 A4NH and WLE seem to be following the ISPC recommendations A4NH, WLE, NA (through additional steps for integration with CRPs through CCAFS, PIM defined flagships, while the CCAFS Summary in Annex 2 suggests the budget cuts: ‘need a totally new business model’, the ISPC understands that only minor changes are now being proposed 167 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 D 1.3 Additional caveats expressed by the Fund Council during its ad hoc meeting on 11 December 2015. The Fund Council noted that its granting of a ‘green light’ to move to full proposal development was subject to the caveats noted by the Working Group and ISPC (in their written submission) and the Fund Council’s request for enhanced focus on gender and capacity building. The Fund Council also specifically acknowledged that CGIAR is engaged in an incremental process and some concerns raised by Fund Council members will require additional time and attention before the new portfolio of CRPs is approved. No Item to address Relevant Summary of how the matters has been adequately addressed CRP(s) 23 Enhanced focus on gender and capacity building All 29. RTB describes priority investments under gender in CRP narrative sub-section 4, each FP sub-section 9 and annex 3 30. RTB describes priority investments under capacity development in CRP narrative and FP sub-sections 10 and annex 2 168 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 E ANNEX 10 E: Note on methods used to estimate RTB contribution to the SRF targets RTB adopted a bottom-up approach to estimate 2022 outcome targets. Targets, estimated at the cluster level using a combination of methods, were aggregated at flagship and CRP levels following a 3-step methodology briefly presented in this note. RTB expected contributions to the SRF targets are presented in PIM Table A. Step 1: Estimation of targets at the cluster level In brief: Country specific targets related to relevant sub-IDOs were calculated using the results of an ex- ante assessment of the impact of crop-specific research options. Key assumptions and parameters used in the ex-ante assessment exercise are available at this link. In 2013-14 RTB carried out an ex-ante assessment of the impact of priority research options on poverty reduction for the main RTB crops (banana, cassava, potato, sweetpotato and yam). The exercise was based on quantitative assessments of adoption potential and the use of an economic surplus model. It included several steps: 1) mapping of crop production by agro-ecology and targeting of research areas; 2) constraints analysis; 3) identification of main research options, which included stakeholder consultation and expert surveys; 4) quantification of key parameters; 5) estimation of research impactsi. The research options identified in the priority-assessment are crop-specific showing a high level of congruence with the crop clusters in the program structure (See Section 1.2, Figure 5). In parallel with the priority assessment, RTB developed initial versions of impact pathways and theory of changes for each cluster which allowed the mapping of the expected contributions against the set of Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs). Parameters elicited for the economic surplus model for each research option and the results obtained provided the main basis for estimating RTB expected contribution to the SRF targets. In particular, the estimated adoption curve was used as the basis for calculating the number of beneficiaries. Estimated cropped area under two adoption scenarios (high and low adoption) was divided by the average cropped area per household to estimate the number of adopting households, and then multiplied by household size to estimate total number of beneficiaries. The impact of each research option on rural poverty reduction was calculated by first estimating the marginal impact on poverty reduction of an increase in the value of agricultural production using poverty reduction elasticities of agricultural productivity growth. The reduction in the total number of poor was then calculated by considering the estimated economic benefits as the additional increase in agricultural production value. The target definition process at the cluster level reveals the broad geographical scope (multi-country) and the integrated approach (multidisciplinary interventions, causal pathway built on the effects promoted by sets of different research outputs) adopted by RTB. Expected changes in crop yields and economic surplus i Please refer to the working papers for more detailed information: http://www.rtb.cgiar.org/category/resources/working-papers/ 169 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 E results for the RTB target countries were used to quantify (sub-)IDO-related targets at the cluster level. A conservative approach was applied to limit possible overestimation of targets and double-counting. In particular, where more than one research option was mapped into the same cluster and for the same country, only the research option that showed the largest number of adopters was considered. The proposal document and delivery flagship projects 2, 3 and 4, presents detailed tables (See Section 2, Table FP2.2., Table FP3.2., and Table FP4.2.) with targets disaggregated by sub-IDO and by cluster. Step 2: Aggregation of cluster level targets at the flagship project level In brief: Within each flagship project, contributions of different clusters to the same sub-IDO were aggregated. Figures were aggregated first at the country level assuming no overlaps in terms of beneficiaries between potato and other RTB crops and assuming an overlap of 90% between banana/ plantain, cassava, sweetpotato and yam. Figures calculated per each country were summed up to obtain an aggregated target per sub-IDO and per Flagship. When defining targets for higher levels (flagships and program), potential estimation biases with multiple crops were considered. RTB deploys its efforts in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. RTB crops are key staple crops in many countries and in some cases are planted together in agri-food systems. In order to reduce any double counting of the expected benefits, the overlap of different crops in the same system was taken into account while aggregating figures. In those countries where more than one cluster was expected to contribute to development outcomes, the number of beneficiaries was calculated by considering the following assumptions 1) the total number of potato-related beneficiaries (this is grown at higher altitudes/cooler latitudes than the other crops with less overlap), 2) the highest number of beneficiaries related to one of the other four crops (ie bananas, cassava, sweetpotato or yam) and 3) 10% of the total number of beneficiaries related to the remaining crops in that country due to the fact that all crops except potato are cultivated in similar agroecologies. A first level of aggregation was obtained with figures presented by sub-IDO and flagship (See Section 2, Table FP2.2., Table FP3.2., Table FP4.2.). 170 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 E Table 1 - RTB outcomes and IDOs for FP5 with details on 2022 targets and countries 2022 Targets IDO ID 1.3 1.4 2.1 3.3 Improved diets for More sustainably Site integration Increased incomes Increased poor and vulnerable managed agro- and employment productivity IDO people ecosystems Unit of measurement # households # households # households # ha Entities with major Country Contributing Clusters LEAD Center(s) /CRP1 infrastructure1 Bangladesh PO2.5, SW2.6, SW4.4 152.650 158.966 7.431 Burkina Faso SW2.6, SW4.4 1.087 7.250 7.250 IITA Cameroon BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, PO2.4 1 0.000 2 7.567 6 2.500 21.077 IITA Congo, DRC BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, PO2.4, SW2.6, SW4.4 1.395.350 1.395.350 100.000 156.769 IITA IITA Ethiopia PO2.4, SW2.6, SW4.4 3.923 104.332 2 6.153 Ghana BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, SW2.6, SW4.4, YA2.7 157.256 157.256 125.000 88.339 IITA IITA India CA2.3, PO2.5, SW2.6, SW4.4 307.480 311.051 5.717 - CIP Kenya BA3.3, BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, PO2.4, SW2.6, SW4.4 1 5.000 82.332 100.000 5.133 CIAT, CIP Malawi BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, PO2.4, SW2.6, SW4.4 3 4.451 142.225 142.225 1 5.519 CIP IITA, CIAT, CIP Mozambique BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, PO2.4, SW2.6, SW4.4 7 5.018 143.260 143.260 101.383 IITA, CIP IITA, CIP Nepal PO2.5 7 6.609 7 6.609 - - Bioversity Nigeria BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, PO2.4, SW2.6, SW4.4, YA2.7 245.612 1.137.875 183.858 344.934 IITA IITA Rwanda BA3.3, BA3.4, CA3.6, CA4.3, PO2.4, SW2.6, SW4.4 1 5.000 256.891 75.000 29.737 CIAT, CIP, IITA CIAT Tanzania BA3.3, BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, PO2.4, SW2.6, SW4.4 7 9.742 184.052 184.052 71.845 IITA, CIAT IITA, CIAT CIAT, CIP/RTB, IITA, Bioveristy, Uganda BA3.3, BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, PO2.4, SW2.6, SW4.4 49.533 708.905 225.194 141.781 Bioversity CIAT, CIP CCAFS/CIAT, Vietnam BA3.4, CA2.3, CA3.5, PO2.5, SW2.6, SW4.4, PO2.5 7 4.673 85.823 5.818 9 7.858 RTB/CIP CIAT Zambia CA2.3, CA3.6, CA4.3, SW2.6, SW4.4 1 7.798 17.798 5 0.000 1 6.035 IITA IITA Due to its strong learning and support nature, FP5 has a theory of change that combines direct contributions to (sub-)IDOs and indirect contributions through synergies and linkages with other delivery flagships. Since FP5 interventions will be concentrated in countries selected for site integration, these countries were considered for estimating targets. As FP5 will integrate and enhance impacts across crops then, in terms of beneficiaries, a complete overlap between clusters intervening in the same country was assumed and the number of beneficiaries was calculated for each combination of country x IDO taking into account only the contribution of the cluster with the highest number of beneficiaries in the country. The results of this exercise are presented in Table 1. Based on this table, additional targets expected as direct FP5 contribution at the (sub-)IDO level were estimated as 20% of these figures. Step 3: Estimation of RTB contribution to SRF targets In brief: For the CRP, two levels of aggregation were considered: the IDO level and the SRF level. For the aggregation at the IDO level, a procedure similar to that applied for estimating target per sub-IDO at the flagship level was used. The difference was that for the IDO level, all contributions across flagships were considered and following the hierarchy presented in Figure 3, Section1, sub-IDO targets were aggregated up to the corresponding IDO. Additional assumptions and methods used for estimating RTB contribution at the SRF level are detailed for each target in this section. The second level of aggregation, corresponding to quantified targets for IDOs at the CRP level, was obtained considering cluster x country contributions to IDOs across flagships. The same conservative approach was applied to limit, as far as possible, double counting of beneficiaries in the same country. Results are presented in Table 2. 171 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 E Table 2 - RTB: Beneficiaries for target IDOs by SLO SLO Target IDOs Total number of beneficiaries (2022)A Primary target countriesB 1 Increased incomes 20,000,000 people (50% women) have increased Africa: and employment their income. Burundi, Cameroon⁺, Congo, Democratic 30,000 small and medium enterprises are Republic of the Congo (DRC)⁺, Ethiopia⁺⁺, operating more profitably in the RTB seed and Ghana⁺, Ivory Coast, Kenya⁺, Malawi⁺, processing sectors. Mozambique⁺, Nigeria⁺⁺, Rwanda⁺, 1, 2 Increased 8,000,000 farm households have increased RTB Tanzania⁺⁺, Uganda⁺, Zambia⁺ productivity yield through adoption of improved varieties and Americas: sustainable management practices. Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Haiti, 2 Improved diets for 10,000,000 people (50% women) have improved Nicaragua⁺⁺, Peru poor and their diet quality (measured by dietary diversity Asia: vulnerable people score). Bangladesh⁺⁺, China, India⁺, Indonesia, 3 More sustainably 1,900,000 ha of current RTB production area Nepal⁺, Thailand, The Philippines, managed agro- converted to sustainable cropping systems. Vietnam⁺⁺ ecosystem A Figures on beneficiaries are aggregated for all RTB crops. Specific ranges for change (e.g., income and yield increase) are presented by cluster/crop in the specific Flagship project document. B The 26 primary target countries where RTB crops are of greatest importance include 17 of the 20 prioritized for CGIAR (2015) site integration (+) and all 6 of those fast-tracked for more intensive integration (CGIAR 2015). The final part of this note presents additional assumptions and figures considered for the estimation of RTB contribution to SRF 2022 targets. SRF Target 1.1 - 100 million more farm household have adopted improved varieties, breeds or trees, and/or improved management practices RTB contribution: 8 million In order to estimate RTB contribution to this target, technologies and practices integrated in impact pathways that to contribute both to SLO1 and SLO3 were considered. This included adopters in FP2 and FP3. For each crop, a complete overlap between the adoption of improved varieties/clean planting materials (mostly captured in FP2) and management practices (mostly captured in FP3) was assumed. For each country, the total number of potato-related beneficiaries were then considered together with the highest number of beneficiaries related to the next most important other crops and only 10% of the beneficiaries related to the remaining other crops. SRF Target 1.2 - 30 million people of which 50% are women, assisted to exit poverty RTB contribution: 3.5 million Results obtained from the ex-ante assessment of the impact of priority research options on poverty reduction were used. For estimating targets in 2022, 2017 was used as year 0 in the economic model and 40% of the poverty reduction figures provided by the economic model were considered for year 10. SRF Target 2.1 - Improve the rate of yield increase for major food staples from current <1% to 1.2- 1.5%/year RTB contribution: 1.4%/year For the full proposal an average yield increase rate was estimated across all RTB crops using FAOSTAT 2015 data. This value is highly indicative and in the RTB case will not be an accurate indicator of CRP contributions. Detailed targets should be adopted by crop and by country/region in order to use this target to track genetic gain and for management purposes. 172 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Annex 10 E SRF Target 2.3 - 150 million more people, of which 50% are women, without deficiencies of one or more of the following essential micronutrients: iron, zinc, iodine, vitamin A, folate, and vitamin B12 RTB contribution: 10 million Expected contributions of Vitamin A-rich sweetpotato, cassava and banana (FP4 and FP2) and incipient contribution of micronutrient-dense (Fe & Zn) potatoes were considered. It was assumed that population targeted in key countries suffers from vitamin A micronutrient deficiency; quantity produced for direct consumption at the household level is positively affecting all household members; spill-over effect through commercialization and inclusion of RTB crops in nutrition-based national programs will be effective in targeted countries. SRF Target 2.4 - 10% reduction in women of reproductive age who are consuming less than adequate number of food groups RTB contribution: 3% Based on WHO country profiles on maternal and perinatal health, the percentage and the total number of women aged 15-49 years as a sub-set of the group of beneficiaries was calculated for target 2.3 in 10 targeted countries were estimated. Based on FAOSTAT data on prevalence of food inadequacy (%) (3-year average) (2011-2013) (Suite of Food Security Indicators, FAOSTAT, 2015) and assuming that prevalence of food inadequacy for women aged 15-49 years is comparable with prevalence of food inadequacy for the total population in the same country, the total number of women aged 15-49 years suffering from food inadequacy was calculated. It was assumed that half of the women aged 15-49 years who will benefit of RTB-related interventions will improve their diet quality and will consume daily an adequate number of food groups. Based on these assumptions target values (expressed as %) for each country and at the CRP level were determined. SRF Target 3.3 - 55 million hectares (ha) degraded land area restored RTB contribution: 1.9 million Number of ha under sustainable management practices estimated in FP3 and FP5 were considered. As targets estimated for FP5 are expressed as additional benefits due to adoption of system innovations, contributions at the CRP level coincide with the sum of flagship targets. 173 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table A Annex 10 F Quantitative ntitative contribution by Country Financial resources SLO contribution to SLO Qua W1+W2 W3 Bilateral OF TOTAL Synergies with other needed CRPs Targets 2022 Congo, DRC Nigeria Uganda China Rwanda Thailand India Tanzania Ghana Malawi Target number Rest of the world % % % % % % 1.1. 100 million more farm household have adopted 8.0 1.5 1.2 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 2.1 1 43,171,866 18% 53% 29% 0% 100% 25% improved varieties, breeds CCAFS, WLE, FTA, or trees, and/or improved DCL, MAIZE, RICE, management practices WHEAT Congo, DRC Uganda Nigeria Malawi Rwanda Burundi Tanzania Mozambique Kenya Indonesia Rest of the world PIM, LIVESTOCK, 1.2. 30 million people of CCAFS, WLE, FTA, 3.5 0.60 0.60 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.25 0.12 0.07 0.05 0.61 1 18,910,089 17% 55% 28% 0% 100% 21% which 50% are women, DCL, MAIZE, RICE, assisted to exit poverty WHEAT Nigeria Uganda China Rwanda Thailand Ghana Rest of the world 2.1. Improve the rate of yield increase for major 1.4 1.0 0.6 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.6 1.4 1 08,287,501 17% 55% 28% 0% 100% GENEBANKS, GENETIC 19% food staples from current GAIN, CCAFS, WLE, <1% to 1.2-1.5%/year DCL, FTA Uganda Nigeria Tanzania Mozambique Malawi Ghana Kenya Congo, DRC Rwanda Benin Rest of the world 2.3. 150 million more people, of which 50% are women, without deficiencies of one or more 10 1.2 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 6 4,972,501 17% 55% 28% 0% 100% 11% of the following essential micronutrients: iron, zinc, iodine, vitamin A, folate, A4NH, LIVESTOCK, and vitamin B12 FISH, MAIZE, RICE Uganda Nigeria Tanzania Mozambique Malawi Ghana Kenya Congo, DRC Rwanda Benin 2.4. 10% reduction in women of reproductive age who are consuming less 3% 3% 2% 2% 3% 5% 7% 1% 2% 2% 5% 4 3,315,000 17% 55% 28% 0% 100% 8% than adequate number of A4NH, LIVESTOCK, food groups FISH, MAIZE, RICE Nigeria Indonesia Congo, DRC Uganda Brazil Mozambique Vietnam Ghana Thailand Angola Rest of the world 3.3. 55 million hectares (ha) degraded land area 1.9 0.35 0.22 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.44 9 7,047,106 22% 43% 35% 0% 100% 17% restored CCAFS, WLE, FTA, DCL 5 75,704,063 100% 174 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table B Annex 10 F FLAGSHIP 1 TOT FP1 Amount needed W1+W2 W1+W2 W3 W3 Bilateral Bilateral OF OF 2022 Outcome description 116,240,658 $ % % % % Outcome 1.1: For each RTB crop, populations with at least 3 end- users preferred traits and adapted to 2 targeted regions are available (For more details please refer to Table FP1.4) 20% 23,248,132 27% 6,276,996 41% 9,531,734 32% 7,439,402 0% - Outcome 1.2: Across RTB crops, average 25% reduction of time needed for traits discovery and incorporation into breeding pipelines 30% 34,872,197 27% 9,415,493 41% 14,297,601 32% 11,159,103 0% - Outcome 1.3: Conservation status of wild relatives and landraces of at least 3 RTB crops improved in 3 key hotspots 15% 17,436,099 27% 4,707,747 41% 7,148,800 32% 5,579,552 0% - Outcome 1.4: At least 20% of newly developed RTB breeding populations with enhanced resilience to climatic shocks available for testing in FP2 15% 17,436,099 27% 4,707,747 41% 7,148,800 32% 5,579,552 0% - Outcome 1.5: Collaboration for more effective breeding enhanced through a breeding community of practices including at least 40 stakeholders in 10 countries 10% 11,624,066 27% 3,138,498 41% 4,765,867 32% 3,719,701 0% - Outcome 1.6: Enhanced capacity in genomic selection and advanced breeding methods of at least 150 R&D partners, of which at least 30% are female, through short and long term trainings 10% 11,624,066 27% 3,138,498 41% 4,765,867 32% 3,719,701 0% - FLAGSHIP 2 Amount needed W1+W2 W1+W2 W3 W3 Bilateral Bilateral OF OF 2022 Outcome description 269,713,958 $ % % % % % % Outcome 2.1: 20,000,000 people (4,000,000 HH), of which 50% are women, increased their annual income by increasing RTB sales and diversifying market strategies 15% 40,457,094 15% 6,068,564 60% 24,274,256 25% 10,114,273 0% - Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 10% 38% 102,491,304 15% 15,373,696 60% 61,494,782 25% 25,622,826 0% - Outcome 2.3: Targeted breeding programs increased by 10% the diversity of the genetic base used (e.g. number of banana wild species used as parental lines) 5% 13,485,698 15% 2,022,855 60% 8,091,419 25% 3,371,424 0% - Outcome 2.4: Annual production of at least one nutrient-rich RTB crop increased by 5-10% in 10 targeted countries 16% 43,154,233 15% 6,473,135 60% 25,892,540 25% 10,788,558 0% - Outcome 2.5: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at least 1,000,000 HH 5% 13,485,698 15% 2,022,855 60% 8,091,419 25% 3,371,424 0% - Outcome 2.6: At least 35% increase in number of female and young beneficiaries of at least 500,000 HH perceive to have better control over assets and resources 4% 10,788,558 15% 1,618,284 60% 6,473,135 25% 2,697,140 0% - Outcome 2.7: Regulatory frameworks for seed production and seed quality control (including QDS) under implementation in10 countries 7% 18,879,977 15% 2,831,997 60% 11,327,986 25% 4,719,994 0% - Outcome 2.8: Every year, 8,000 R&D stakeholders (50% female) trained through short term programs on designing and implementing smallholder-oriented breeding programs and sustainable seed systems 10% 26,971,396 15% 4,045,709 60% 16,182,837 25% 6,742,849 0% - 175 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table B Annex 10 F FLAGSHIP 3 Amount needed W1+W2 W1+W2 W3 W3 Bilateral Bilateral OF OF 2022 Outcome description 161,420,193 $ % % % % % Outcome 3.1: In areas affected by pests and diseases, RTB yield restored to previous infection conditions by at least 1,500,000 farmer HH, of which at least 25% are female headed households 36% 58,111,269 20% 11,622,254 39% 22,663,395 41% 23,825,620 0% - Outcome 3.2: 1,800,000 ha of current RTB production area converted to sustainable cropping systems 25% 40,355,048 20% 8,071,010 39% 15,738,469 41% 16,545,570 0% - Outcome 3.3: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at least 1,000,000 HH 20% 32,284,039 20% 6,456,808 39% 12,590,775 41% 13,236,456 0% - Outcome 3.4: New technologies and practices have been equally adopted by women and men farmers 5% 8,071,010 20% 1,614,202 39% 3,147,694 41% 3,309,114 0% - Outcome 3.5: 25 National and 5 regional plant protection agencies with strategies for containment and management under implementation 7% 11,299,414 20% 2,259,883 39% 4,406,771 41% 4,632,760 0% - Outcome 3.6: Growing number of extension services (governmental org., NGOs and private sector) providing advice on improved ICM and IPDM increased 7% 11,299,414 20% 2,259,883 39% 4,406,771 41% 4,632,760 0% - FLAGSHIP 4 Amount needed W1+W2 W1+W2 W3 W3 Bilateral Bilateral OF OF 2022 Outcome description 116,083,835 $ % % % % % % Outcome 4.1: 700,000 households, 25% of which are female headed, have increased their income by 15-20% by increasing and diversifying RTB sales (food, feed, industrial raw material and seeds) 20% 23,216,767 12% 2,786,012 63% 14,626,563 25% 5,804,192 0% - Outcome 4.2: 20,000 small scale processors, 30 % of which are female, reduced water- and energy- related production costs by 15-20% in cassava sector with growing spillover in other RTB crops 20% 23,216,767 12% 2,786,012 63% 14,626,563 25% 5,804,192 0% - Outcome 4.3: Post-harvest physical and quality losses reduced in at least 10 countries through better post-harvest management, improved storage, and utilization of waste across RTB crops 15% 17,412,575 12% 2,089,509 63% 10,969,922 25% 4,353,144 0% - Outcome 4.4: Diet quality indices increased by 20% for at least 2,000,000 farmer households and urban/rural consumers 25% 29,020,959 12% 3,482,515 63% 18,283,204 25% 7,255,240 0% - Outcome 4.5: At least 35% increase in number of women and youth beneficiaries in at least 200,000 HH who perceive to have better control over assets and resources 8% 9,286,707 12% 1,114,405 63% 5,850,625 25% 2,321,677 0% - Outcome 4.6: Food-based nutrition programs/ initiatives promoting RTB crops under implementation in at least 10 countries 6% 6,965,030 12% 835,804 63% 4,387,969 25% 1,741,258 0% - Outcome 4.7: 60 development-focused organizations, including women's networks and alliances, having increased their capacity for innovation (e.g. enhanced human capital and improved collaboration network in relevant domains) to scale up fuller utilization of RTB 6% 6,965,030 12% 835,804 63% 4,387,969 25% 1,741,258 0% - 176 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table B Annex 10 F FLAGSHIP 5 Amount needed W1+W2 W1+W2 W3 W3 Bilateral Bilateral OF OF 2022 Outcome description 130,594,815 $ % % % % % % Outcome 5.1: Income increased by 20% for at least 550,000 HH 15% 19,589,222 25% 4,897,306 53% 10,382,288 22% 4,309,629 0% - Outcome 5.2: Whole-farm productivity increased by 25% for at least 1,000,000 HH 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - Outcome 5.3: Diet quality indices increased by 20% for at least 300,000 farmer households 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - Outcome 5.4: Improved soil management practices adopted on at least 200,000 ha cultivated by smallholder farmers 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - Outcome 5.5: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at least 500,000 HH 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - Outcome 5.6: At least 35% increase in number of female and young beneficiaries of at least 200,000 HH perceive to have better control over assets and resources 5% 6,529,741 25% 1,632,435 53% 3,460,763 22% 1,436,543 0% - Outcome 5.7: RTB delivery flagships and at least 55 research and development partner organizations with more gender- responsive planning and implementation processes, reflected in at least 5 additional collaborative arrangements with public sector and civil society organizations supporting gender transformation 5% 6,529,741 25% 1,632,435 53% 3,460,763 22% 1,436,543 0% - Outcome 5.8: At least 66 cases where RTB crops/technologies are newly included in policies or programs executed by government agencies, NGOs, and/or private sector 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - Outcome 5.9: At least 1,500 research/development staff in RTB and in mixed-type partner organizations across prime target countries with strengthened research and innovation capacities including gender-responsive and transformative research 15% 19,589,222 25% 4,897,306 53% 10,382,288 22% 4,309,629 0% - Outcome 5.10: At least 5 partnership and scaling models tested in a minimum of 5 target countries and adjusted to be fit for purpose 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - 794,053,459 177 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table C Annex 10 F FLAGSHIP 1 Amount needed W1+W2 W1&2 W3 W3 Bilateral BLR OF OF Sub-IDO Name 116,240,658 $ % % % % 1.4.3 Enhanced genetic gain 20% 23,248,132 27% 6,276,996 41% 9,531,734 32% 7,439,402 0% - 1.4.4 Increased conservation and use of genetic resources 30% 34,872,197 27% 9,415,493 41% 14,297,601 32% 11,159,103 0% - 3.2.3 Enrichment of plant and animal biodiversity for multiple goods and services. 15% 17,436,099 27% 4,707,747 41% 7,148,800 32% 5,579,552 0% - 3.3.2 Enhanced adaptive capacity to climate risks 10% 11,624,066 27% 3,138,498 41% 4,765,867 32% 3,719,701 0% - A.1.4 Enhanced capacity to deal with climatic risks and extremes 5% 5,812,033 27% 1,569,249 41% 2,382,933 32% 1,859,851 0% - D.1.1 Enhanced institutional capacity of partner research organizations 10% 11,624,066 27% 3,138,498 41% 4,765,867 32% 3,719,701 0% - D.1.2 Enhanced individual capacity in partner research organizations through training and exchange 10% 11,624,066 27% 3,138,498 41% 4,765,867 32% 3,719,701 0% - FLAGSHIP 2 Amount needed W1+W2 W1&2 W3 W3 Bilateral BLR OF OF Sub-IDO Name 269,713,958 $ % % % % 1.3.1 Diversified enterprise opportunities 15% 40,457,094 15% 6,068,564 60% 24,274,256 25% 10,114,273 0% - 1.4.2 Closed yield gaps through improved agronomic and animal husbandry practices 18% 48,548,512 15% 7,282,277 60% 29,129,107 25% 12,137,128 0% - 1.4.3 Enhanced genetic gain 20% 53,942,792 15% 8,091,419 60% 32,365,675 25% 13,485,698 0% - 1.4.4 Increased conservation and use of genetic resources 5% 13,485,698 15% 2,022,855 60% 8,091,419 25% 3,371,424 0% - 2.1.1 Increased availability of diverse nutrient-rich foods 16% 43,154,233 15% 6,473,135 60% 25,892,540 25% 10,788,558 0% - 3.3.2 Enhanced adaptive capacity to climate risks 3% 8,091,419 15% 1,213,713 60% 4,854,851 25% 2,022,855 0% - A.1.4 Enhanced capacity to deal with climatic risks and extremes 2% 5,394,279 15% 809,142 60% 3,236,567 25% 1,348,570 0% - B.1.1 Gender-equitable control of productive assets and resources 4% 10,788,558 15% 1,618,284 60% 6,473,135 25% 2,697,140 0% - C.1.3 Conducive agricultural policy environment 7% 18,879,977 15% 2,831,997 60% 11,327,986 25% 4,719,994 0% - D.1.2 Enhanced individual capacity in partner research organizations through training and exchange 10% 26,971,396 15% 4,045,709 60% 16,182,837 25% 6,742,849 0% - 178 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table C Annex 10 F FLAGSHIP 3 Amount needed W1+W2 W1&2 W3 W3 Bilateral BLR OF OF Sub-IDO Name 161,420,193 $ % % % % 1.4.1 Reduced pre- and post- production losses, including those caused by climate change 18% 29,055,635 20% 5,811,127 39% 11,331,698 41% 11,912,810 0% - 1.4.2 Closed yield gaps through improved agronomic and animal husbandry practices 18% 29,055,635 20% 5,811,127 39% 11,331,698 41% 11,912,810 0% - 3.3.1 Increased resilience of agro- ecosystems and communities, especially those including smallholders 25% 40,355,048 20% 8,071,010 39% 15,738,469 41% 16,545,570 0% - 3.3.2 Enhanced adaptive capacity to climate risks 15% 24,213,029 20% 4,842,606 39% 9,443,081 41% 9,927,342 0% - A.1.4 Enhanced capacity to deal with climatic risks and extremes 5% 8,071,010 20% 1,614,202 39% 3,147,694 41% 3,309,114 0% - B.1.1 Gender-equitable control of productive assets and resources 5% 8,071,010 20% 1,614,202 39% 3,147,694 41% 3,309,114 0% - C.1.3 Conducive agricultural policy environment 7% 11,299,414 20% 2,259,883 39% 4,406,771 41% 4,632,760 0% - D.1.4 Increased capacity for innovation in partner development organizations and in poor and vulnerable communities 7% 11,299,414 20% 2,259,883 39% 4,406,771 41% 4,632,760 0% - FLAGSHIP 4 Amount needed W1+W2 W1&2 W3 W3 Bilateral BLR OF OF Sub-IDO Name 116,083,835 $ % % % % 1.3.1 Diversified enterprise opportunities 20% 23,216,767 12% 2,786,012 63% 14,626,563 25% 5,804,192 0% - 1.3.4 More efficient use of inputs 20% 23,216,767 12% 2,786,012 63% 14,626,563 25% 5,804,192 0% - 1.4.1 Reduced pre- and post- production losses, including those caused by climate change 15% 17,412,575 12% 2,089,509 63% 10,969,922 25% 4,353,144 0% - 2.1.3 Optimized consumption of diverse nutrient-rich foods 25% 29,020,959 12% 3,482,515 63% 18,283,204 25% 7,255,240 0% - B.1.1 Gender-equitable control of productive assets and resources 8% 9,286,707 12% 1,114,405 63% 5,850,625 25% 2,321,677 0% - C.1.3 Conducive agricultural policy environment 6% 6,965,030 12% 835,804 63% 4,387,969 25% 1,741,258 0% - D.1.4 Increased capacity for innovation in partner development organizations and in poor and vulnerable communities 6% 6,965,030 12% 835,804 63% 4,387,969 25% 1,741,258 0% - 179 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table C Annex 10 F FLAGSHIP 5 Amount needed W1+W2 W1&2 W3 W3 Bilateral BLR OF OF Sub-IDO Name 130,594,815 $ % % % % 1.3.1 Diversified enterprise opportunities 15% 19,589,222 25% 4,897,306 53% 10,382,288 22% 4,309,629 0% - 1.4.2 Closed yield gaps through improved agronomic and animal husbandry practices 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - 2.1.3 Optimized consumption of diverse nutrient-rich foods 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - 3.2.2 Agricultural systems diversified and intensified in ways that protect soils and water 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - 3.3.2 Enhanced adaptive capacity to climate risks 5% 6,529,741 25% 1,632,435 53% 3,460,763 22% 1,436,543 0% - A.1.4 Enhanced capacity to deal with climatic risks and extremes 5% 6,529,741 25% 1,632,435 53% 3,460,763 22% 1,436,543 0% - B.1.1 Gender-equitable control of productive assets and resources 5% 6,529,741 25% 1,632,435 53% 3,460,763 22% 1,436,543 0% - B.1.3 Improved capacity of women and young people to participate in decision- making 5% 6,529,741 25% 1,632,435 53% 3,460,763 22% 1,436,543 0% - C.1.1 Increased capacity of beneficiaries to adopt research outputs 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - D.1.1 Enhanced institutional capacity of partner research organizations 8% 10,447,585 25% 2,611,896 53% 5,537,220 22% 2,298,469 0% - D.1.2 Enhanced individual capacity in partner research organizations through training and exchange 7% 9,141,637 25% 2,285,409 53% 4,845,068 22% 2,011,160 0% - D.1.4 Increased capacity for innovation in partner development organizations and in poor and vulnerable communities 10% 13,059,482 25% 3,264,870 53% 6,921,525 22% 2,873,086 0% - 794,053,459 180 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table D Annex 10 F FP Year Milestone Means of verifying Related outcome Outcome 1.1: For each RTB crop, populations with at least 3 end-users Scientific publications and preferred traits and adapted to 2 targeted regions are available (For more 1 2018 5 new tools applied for genomic mapping and editing reports details please refer to Table FP1.4) Outcome 1.1: For each RTB crop, populations with at least 3 end-users Markers for pest and disease traits developed and tested in 15 Scientific publications and preferred traits and adapted to 2 targeted regions are available (For more 1 2019 crop x pest/disease combinations reports details please refer to Table FP1.4) Outcome 1.1: For each RTB crop, populations with at least 3 end-users 4 data management platforms linking genomic and breeding data preferred traits and adapted to 2 targeted regions are available (For more 1 2020 under implementation Open-access data bases details please refer to Table FP1.4) Participatory methods for trait definition and selection (including at least 30% of female participants) used in 50% of RTB/partners Outcome 1.2: Across RTB crops, average 25% reduction of time needed for 1 2018 joint activities Programme and Project Reports traits discovery and incorporation into breeding pipelines Platforms for high-throughput phenotyping under implementation for at least 4 RTB crops Annual reports of innovation Outcome 1.2: Across RTB crops, average 25% reduction of time needed for 1 2020 coalitions traits discovery and incorporation into breeding pipelines Baseline data on conservation status available in open access Outcome 1.3: Conservation status of wild relatives and landraces of at least 3 1 2018 databases for at least 2 target crops Open-access data bases RTB crops improved in 3 key hotspots Best practices and monitoring systems identified and Scientific publications and Outcome 1.3: Conservation status of wild relatives and landraces of at least 3 1 2019 characterized reports RTB crops improved in 3 key hotspots Functional policies and incentive systems piloted in 5 countries and recommendations formulated for dissemination of successful Annual reports of relevant Outcome 1.3: Conservation status of wild relatives and landraces of at least 3 1 2020 models stakeholders RTB crops improved in 3 key hotspots Platforms for high-throughput phenotyping for climate resilience under development for at least 4 RTB crops Scientific publications and Outcome 1.4: At least 20% of newly developed RTB breeding populations with 1 2019 reports enhanced resilience to climatic shocks available for testing in FP2 Platforms for high-throughput phenotyping for climate resilience under implementation for at least 3 RTB crops Scientific publications and Outcome 1.4: At least 20% of newly developed RTB breeding populations with 1 2021 reports enhanced resilience to climatic shocks available for testing in FP2 Outcome 1.5: Collaboration for more effective breeding enhanced through a Breeding community of practice established in collaboration with Annual reports of relevant breeding community of practices including at least 40 stakeholders in 10 1 2017 at least 15 stakeholders in 6 countries stakeholders countries Outcome 1.5: Collaboration for more effective breeding enhanced through a Breeding community of practice under implementation in Annual reports of relevant breeding community of practices including at least 40 stakeholders in 10 1 2019 collaboration with at least 20 stakeholders in 6 countries stakeholders countries Outcome 1.6: Enhanced capacity in genomic selection and advanced breeding Partner institutions identify at least 20 candidates (at least 30% Annual reports of relevant methods of at least 150 R&D partners, of which at least 30% are female, 1 2018 female) for advanced degree training stakeholders through short and long term trainings Outcome 1.6: Enhanced capacity in genomic selection and advanced breeding At least 15 candidates supported for advanced degree training, of Annual reports of relevant methods of at least 150 R&D partners, of which at least 30% are female, 1 2020 which at least 30% are female stakeholders through short and long term trainings Rapid multiplication techniques for seed/planting material Outcome 2.1: 20,000,000 people (4,000,000 HH), of which 50% are women, validated and framework to support best fitting options for increased their annual income by increasing RTB sales and diversifying market 2 2018 different seed multipliers categories developed Programme and Project Reports strategies Outcome 2.1: 20,000,000 people (4,000,000 HH), of which 50% are women, Seed business models developed and under testing in at least 6 increased their annual income by increasing RTB sales and diversifying market 2 2019 countries Programme and Project Reports strategies Outcome 2.1: 20,000,000 people (4,000,000 HH), of which 50% are women, New market-oriented approaches for diversified RTB products increased their annual income by increasing RTB sales and diversifying market 2 2020 piloted in at least 5 countries Programme and Project Reports strategies Outcome 2.1: 20,000,000 people (4,000,000 HH), of which 50% are women, 5,000 profitable decentralized seed business created, of which increased their annual income by increasing RTB sales and diversifying market 2 2021 30% are run by women and young people Study reports, Project reports strategies Crop-specific evidences collected on the effect of genotype, Scientific publications and Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 2 2017 management and environment on seed degeneration rate reports 10% At least 6 crop and soil fertility management practices refined for Scientific publications and Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 2 2018 new varieties reports 10% 50% of candidate varieties (RTB-input) with full panel of user- Annual reports of national preferred traits annually included in national trials for variety breeding programs and other Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 2 2018 release relevant partners 10% Programme and Project Reports, At least 1 Intergrated technology package (quality seed/improved Annual reports of relevant Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 2 2019 varieties + ICM) per crop disseminated stakeholders 10% 5 global and crop-specific decision support tools fine-tuned for an integrated management of seed degeneration Scientific publications and Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 2 2019 reports 10% Annual reports of national breeding programs and other 75% of varieties (RTB-input) with full panel of user-preferred relevant partners, National Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 2 2020 traits annually released catalogues on variety released 10% Increased number of farmer HH adopting improved post-harvest techniques including adapted storage facilities, especially for on- Adoption study reports, Project Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 2 2021 farm seed management reports 10% 181 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table D Annex 10 F National statistics, Adoption study reports, Project reports, Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 2 2021 Increased number of farmer HH adopting improved varieties Modelling 10% National statistics, Adoption Increased number of HH (at least 2,500,000) adopting improved study reports, Project reports, Outcome 2.2: At least 5,000,000 HH increased their annual RTB yield by at least 2 2022 agronomic practices for RTB ware and seed production Modelling 10% Gender-differentiated users-need and preferences for trait Scientific publications and Outcome 2.3: Targeted breeding programs increased by 10% the diversity of selection assessed in 15 countries and results communicated to reports, Annual reports of the genetic base used (e.g. number of banana wild species used as parental 2 2017 orient breeding programs relevant stakeholders lines) Traditional knowledge of the landraces and wild relatives for Scientific publications and Outcome 2.3: Targeted breeding programs increased by 10% the diversity of banana in 2 countries documented for traits of importance, reports, Annual reports of the genetic base used (e.g. number of banana wild species used as parental 2 2019 traditional uses, and other cultural and socio-economic aspects relevant stakeholders lines) Traditional knowledge of the landraces and wild relatives for Outcome 2.3: Targeted breeding programs increased by 10% the diversity of banana in 5 countries documented for traits of importance, the genetic base used (e.g. number of banana wild species used as parental 2 2021 traditional uses, and other cultural and socio-economic aspects Scientific publications, reports lines) Annual reports of national 30% of candidate nutritious varieties (RTB-input) annually breeding programs and other Outcome 2.4: Annual production of at least one nutrient-rich RTB crop 2 2018 included in target country national trials for variety release relevant partners increased by 5-10% in 10 targeted countries Annual reports of national breeding programs and other 50% of candidate nutritious varieties (RTB-input) included in relevant partners, National Outcome 2.4: Annual production of at least one nutrient-rich RTB crop 2 2020 national trials effectively released catalogues on variety released increased by 5-10% in 10 targeted countries National statistics, Adoption study reports, Project reports, 3,500,000 households, of which at least 25% are female headed, Modelling, disaggregated data Outcome 2.4: Annual production of at least one nutrient-rich RTB crop 2 2021 adopting nutritious varieties used in adoption studies increased by 5-10% in 10 targeted countries Climate responsive breeding targets developed for all crops in at Scientific publications and Outcome 2.5: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 2 2017 least 5 target environments reports least 1,000,000 HH Annual reports of national 40% of breeding populations showing improved resilience under breeding programs and other Outcome 2.5: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 2 2018 fututre climates included in national breeding programs relevant partners least 1,000,000 HH Annual reports of national 20% of breeding populations with drought tolerance and other breeding programs and other traits of importance for resilience to future climates released as relevant partners, National Outcome 2.5: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 2 2020 varieties catalogues on variety released least 1,000,000 HH Baseline of gender roles in seed multiplication and/or crop Outcome 2.6: At least 35% increase in number of female and young production and/or varietal selection available in five Scientific publications and beneficiaries of at least 500,000 HH perceive to have better control over assets 2 2017 countries/crops reports and resources Women's participation increased by 30% for the design of RTB supported capacity development and extension interventions in Outcome 2.6: At least 35% increase in number of female and young the field of seed multiplication / seed management / crop beneficiaries of at least 500,000 HH perceive to have better control over assets 2 2020 management designed Programme and project reports and resources Specific study reports and disaggregated data used in Outcome 2.6: At least 35% increase in number of female and young At least 25% of HH adopting improved varieties/seeds are female adoption studies and other beneficiaries of at least 500,000 HH perceive to have better control over assets 2 2021 headed households documents and resources Regulatory frameworks for seed production and seed quality Annual reports and official control (including QDS) developed and under discussion in 10 document of relevant Outcome 2.7: Regulatory frameworks for seed production and seed quality 2 2018 countries stakeholders control (including QDS) under implementation in10 countries Annual reports and official Regulatory frameworks for seed production and seed quality document of relevant Outcome 2.7: Regulatory frameworks for seed production and seed quality 2 2020 control (including QDS) approved in 10 countries stakeholders control (including QDS) under implementation in10 countries Benefit-sharing mechanisms protecting custodian farmers rights Annual reports and official and facilitating the exchange of Musa genetic resources piloted in document of relevant Outcome 2.7: Regulatory frameworks for seed production and seed quality 2 2021 3 countries and recommendations formulated stakeholders control (including QDS) under implementation in10 countries Annual reports and official RTB included in national food security related policies and document of relevant Outcome 2.7: Regulatory frameworks for seed production and seed quality 2 2021 initiatives in at least 10 countries stakeholders control (including QDS) under implementation in10 countries Outcome 2.8: Every year, 8,000 R&D stakeholders (50% female) trained through 150 individuals (50% female) trained through long term programs short term programs on designing and implementing smallholder-oriented 2 2021 (e.g.MSc and PhD students) Programme and Projects reports breeding programs and sustainable seed systems Outcome 3.1: In areas affected by pests and diseases, RTB yield restored to Scientific publications and previous infection conditions by at least 1,500,000 farmer HH, of which at least 3 2017 Baseline of pest incidence and damage available for 10 countries reports 25% are female headed households Outcome 3.1: In areas affected by pests and diseases, RTB yield restored to Global Pest Risk Analysis (PRA) available for at least 3 target RTB Scientific publications and previous infection conditions by at least 1,500,000 farmer HH, of which at least 3 2017 pests and diseases reports 25% are female headed households Best practices and novel approaches for quality seed systems and Outcome 3.1: In areas affected by pests and diseases, RTB yield restored to farmer/community action for IPM identified and tested in at least Scientific publications and previous infection conditions by at least 1,500,000 farmer HH, of which at least 3 2018 10 countries reports 25% are female headed households 182 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table D Annex 10 F Epidemiological models for better understanding of host-virus- Outcome 3.1: In areas affected by pests and diseases, RTB yield restored to vector dynamics progressively adapted to diverse cropping Scientific publications and previous infection conditions by at least 1,500,000 farmer HH, of which at least 3 2018 systems and results documented reports 25% are female headed households Outcome 3.1: In areas affected by pests and diseases, RTB yield restored to Scientific publications and previous infection conditions by at least 1,500,000 farmer HH, of which at least 3 2019 At least 5 user-specific and locally adapted IPM strategies refined reports 25% are female headed households Programme and Project reports, Outcome 3.1: In areas affected by pests and diseases, RTB yield restored to Locally adapted approaches for quality seed systems and Annual reports of relevant previous infection conditions by at least 1,500,000 farmer HH, of which at least 3 2020 farmer/community action for IPM disseminated in 20 countries stakeholders 25% are female headed households National statistics, Adoption study reports, Project reports, Outcome 3.1: In areas affected by pests and diseases, RTB yield restored to Individual and community strategies for IPM equally adopted by Modelling, disaggregated data previous infection conditions by at least 1,500,000 farmer HH, of which at least 3 2021 male and female farmers in 1,200,000 HH used in adoption studies 25% are female headed households At least 5 gender-sensitive and site-specifc practices for crop, soil fertility and water management validated under diverse agro- Scientific publications and Outcome 3.2: 1,800,000 ha of current RTB production area converted to 3 2018 ecologies reports sustainable cropping systems Development and testing of decision support systems for ICM in Scientific publications and Outcome 3.2: 1,800,000 ha of current RTB production area converted to 3 2019 different agroecologies and for different crops reports sustainable cropping systems Priority locations for pest/disease invasion identified based upon solid predictions of cross-border spread and impact of plant Scientific publications and Outcome 3.2: 1,800,000 ha of current RTB production area converted to 3 2019 pathogens and pests reports sustainable cropping systems Multi-stakeholder initiatives for promoting refinement and scale Programme and Project reports, of selected sustainable management practices under Annual reports of relevant Outcome 3.2: 1,800,000 ha of current RTB production area converted to 3 2020 implementation in 10 countries stakeholders sustainable cropping systems Programme and Project reports, Results provided by prediction models used for the development Annual reports of relevant Outcome 3.2: 1,800,000 ha of current RTB production area converted to 3 2020 of at least 50% of new sustainable management practices stakeholders sustainable cropping systems Programme and Project reports, Results provided by prediction models used for developing or Annual reports of relevant Outcome 3.2: 1,800,000 ha of current RTB production area converted to 3 2021 updating national and regional strategies stakeholders sustainable cropping systems National statistics, Adoption Gender-sensitive, context -specific agronomic practices adopted study reports, Project reports, in 1,200,000 HH, of which at least 25% are female headed Modelling, disaggregated data Outcome 3.2: 1,800,000 ha of current RTB production area converted to 3 2021 households used in adoption studies sustainable cropping systems Downscaled climate change models linked to insect disease Scientific publications, Outcome 3.3: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 3 2017 modelling for at least 5 major pest/regional combinations databases/models and reports least 1,000,000 HH 90% of newly developed prediction models and PRA realized Scientific publications and Outcome 3.3: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 3 2019 explicitly consider climate change effects reports least 1,000,000 HH At least 60% of developed IPM/ICM management strategies Scientific publications and Outcome 3.3: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 3 2021 assessed in terms of adaptation to future climates reports least 1,000,000 HH At least 50% of developed IPM/ICM management strategies Scientific publications and contribute in strengthening male and female farmers' adaptation reports documenting on-farm Outcome 3.3: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 3 2022 capacity to climate change trials least 1,000,000 HH Gender differentiated needs assessment of capacity development Scientific publications and Outcome 3.4: New technologies and practices have been equally adopted 3 2017 available in at least 8 pest/country combinations reports women and men farmers Women's participation increased by at least 30% for the design of RTB supported capacity development and extension Outcome 3.4: New technologies and practices have been equally adopted 3 2019 interventions in the field of IPM and ICM Programme and Projects reports women and men farmers At least 33% of female participants ensured in all capacity Programme and Projects development efforts (including extension services providing reports, Annual reports of Outcome 3.4: New technologies and practices have been equally adopted 3 2020 advice on ICM and IPM) relevant stakeholders women and men farmers Cost effective diagnostic tools and protocols developed for at Scientific publications and Outcome 3.5: 25 National and 5 regional plant protection agencies with 3 2017 least 3 key pests and diseases reports strategies for containment and management under implementation 25 National and 5 regional plant protection agencies with improved strategies for pests and diseases containment and Annual reports of relevant Outcome 3.5: 25 National and 5 regional plant protection agencies with 3 2019 management stakeholders strategies for containment and management under implementation Monitoring networks established in collaboration with NARS in 30 countries/regions to record the geographic distribution and Annual reports of relevant Outcome 3.5: 25 National and 5 regional plant protection agencies with 3 2020 incidence of chronic and emerging pests and diseases stakeholders, projects reports strategies for containment and management under implementation Engagement of stakeholders in impact pathway analysis for at Outcome 3.6: Growing number of extension services (governmental org., NGOs 3 2017 least 3 cluster/country combination Programme and Projects reports and private sector) providing advice on improved ICM and IPDM increased R&D partners and farmers test in at least 3 initiatives user- specific and gender-sensitive models for technology refinement Annual reports of relevant Outcome 3.6: Growing number of extension services (governmental org., NGOs 3 2018 and scaling stakeholders, projects reports and private sector) providing advice on improved ICM and IPDM increased R&D partners and farmers implement in at least 10 initiatives user-specific and gender-sensitive models for technology Annual reports of relevant Outcome 3.6: Growing number of extension services (governmental org., NGOs 3 2020 refinement and scaling stakeholders, projects reports and private sector) providing advice on improved ICM and IPDM increased 183 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table D Annex 10 F RTB value chains, including processing supply chains and fresh market chains, analysed in 5 countries, with a gender-sensitive Outcome 4.1: 700,000 households, 25% of which are female headed, have approach, to identifiy opportunities for products improvement/ Scientific publications and increased their income by 15-20% by increasing and diversifying RTB sales 4 2017 development reports (food, feed, industrial raw material and seeds) At least 6 processes and protocols for expanding and diversiying Outcome 4.1: 700,000 households, 25% of which are female headed, have RTB sales (processed products and fresh produce) jointly defined Annual reports of relevant increased their income by 15-20% by increasing and diversifying RTB sales 4 2018 with producers, processors, and traders and NARS stakeholders, projects reports (food, feed, industrial raw material and seeds) At least 4 processes and protocols for expanding and diversiying Outcome 4.1: 700,000 households, 25% of which are female headed, have RTB sales tested with producers, processors, and traders and Annual reports of relevant increased their income by 15-20% by increasing and diversifying RTB sales 4 2019 NARS stakeholders, projects reports (food, feed, industrial raw material and seeds) At least 2 processes and protocols for expanding and diversiying Outcome 4.1: 700,000 households, 25% of which are female headed, have RTB sales under dissemination with producers, processors, and Annual reports of relevant increased their income by 15-20% by increasing and diversifying RTB sales 4 2020 traders stakeholders, projects reports (food, feed, industrial raw material and seeds) Increased RTB sales and employment, of which 33% direclty Outcome 4.1: 700,000 households, 25% of which are female headed, have benefit women and young people, created in RTB value chains increased their income by 15-20% by increasing and diversifying RTB sales 4 2021 (measured at intervention site level for selected countries) Study reports, Project reports (food, feed, industrial raw material and seeds) Outcome 4.2: 20,000 small scale processors, 30 % of which are female, reduced Baseline of efficiencies and processing losses available for 5 local Scientific publications and water- and energy- related production costs by 15-20% in cassava sector with 4 2017 SME types in 3 countries reports growing spillover in other RTB crops More efficient processing technologies, supply chain Outcome 4.2: 20,000 small scale processors, 30 % of which are female, reduced management models, and waste management options tested in Scientific publications, study water- and energy- related production costs by 15-20% in cassava sector with 4 2018 at least 3 countries reports, Project reports growing spillover in other RTB crops More efficient processing technologies, supply chain Outcome 4.2: 20,000 small scale processors, 30 % of which are female, reduced management models, and waste management options water- and energy- related production costs by 15-20% in cassava sector with 4 2020 disseminated in at least 3 countries Study reports, Project reports growing spillover in other RTB crops RTB value chains analysed in 5 countries to identify priority entry Outcome 4.3: Post-harvest physical and quality losses reduced in at least 10 points for reducing post-harvest losses, improving storage, and Scientific publications and countries through better post-harvest management, improved storage, and 4 2017 stepping up waste utilization reports utilization of waste across RTB crops Locally-adapted and user-demanded post-harvest, storage, and Outcome 4.3: Post-harvest physical and quality losses reduced in at least 10 waste utilization technologies and management options Annual reports of relevant countries through better post-harvest management, improved storage, and 4 2018 developed and tested in 10 countries stakeholders, projects reports utilization of waste across RTB crops Promising technologies and management options selected by Outcome 4.3: Post-harvest physical and quality losses reduced in at least 10 stakeholders, partnerships formed and dissemination plans Annual reports of relevant countries through better post-harvest management, improved storage, and 4 2019 developed for large scale dissemination stakeholders, projects reports utilization of waste across RTB crops Locally-adapted and user-demanded post-harvest, storage, and Study reports, Annual reports of Outcome 4.3: Post-harvest physical and quality losses reduced in at least 10 waste utilization technologies and management options relevant stakeholders, projects countries through better post-harvest management, improved storage, and 4 2020 disseminated in 10 countries reports utilization of waste across RTB crops For ongoing dissemination of OFSP, biofortified cassava, and other nutritious RTB crops: nutrition education/counseling and SBCC methodologies, partnerships, metrics and results Scientific publications and Outcome 4.4: Diet quality indices increased by 20% for at least 2,000,000 4 2017 documented and analyzed in 10 countries reports farmer households and urban/rural consumers Dissemination approaches more effective and efficient through use of improved education/counseling and SBCC methods, better targeting through partnerships with nutrition/health agencies, and stronger monitoring and learning based on improved metrics Study reports, Annual reports of and processes - applied to OFSP, biofortied cassava and relevant stakeholders, projects Outcome 4.4: Diet quality indices increased by 20% for at least 2,000,000 4 2018 additional RTB crops in 10 countries reports farmer households and urban/rural consumers Study reports, Annual reports of At least 2,600,000 consumers improve their diet quality through relevant stakeholders, National Outcome 4.4: Diet quality indices increased by 20% for at least 2,000,000 4 2020 affordable, safe and nutritious RTB foods statistics farmer households and urban/rural consumers Diet quality, including diet diversity, improved for 50% of women of reproductive age and children under 5 years of age in at least Outcome 4.4: Diet quality indices increased by 20% for at least 2,000,000 4 2022 2,000,000 HH Study reports farmer households and urban/rural consumers Outcome 4.5: At least 35% increase in number of women and youth Gender analysis of RTB value chains and RTB post-harvest Scientific publications and beneficiaries in at least 200,000 HH who perceive to have better control over 4 2017 intervention approaches documented in 4 countries reports assets and resources Study reports, Annual reports of Outcome 4.5: At least 35% increase in number of women and youth Approaches for developing more gender inclusive RTB value relevant stakeholders, projects beneficiaries in at least 200,000 HH who perceive to have better control over 4 2019 chains refined and under implementation in 10 countries reports assets and resources RTB crops and products compliant with national nutrition and Study reports, Annual reports of safety standards for inclusion in mainstream national nutrition relevant stakeholders, projects Outcome 4.6: Food-based nutrition programs/ initiatives promoting RTB crops 4 2018 programs in at least 3 countries reports under implementation in at least 10 countries Study reports, Annual reports of RTB crops and products actively promoted by mainstream relevant stakeholders, projects Outcome 4.6: Food-based nutrition programs/ initiatives promoting RTB crops 4 2019 national nutrition programs in at least 6 countries reports under implementation in at least 10 countries 184 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table D Annex 10 F RTB crops and products actively promoted by mainstream national nutrition programs in at least 10 countries, with Study reports, Annual reports of commercial sector investments in highly nutritious RTB foods in relevant stakeholders, projects Outcome 4.6: Food-based nutrition programs/ initiatives promoting RTB crops 4 2021 at least 2 countries reports under implementation in at least 10 countries Novel institutional arrangements (e.g. research-private industry Outcome 4.7: 60 development-focused organizations, including women's innovation platforms) established in 4 countries to foster networks and alliances, having increased their capacity for innovation (e.g. innovation and scaling of RTB processing technologies and value Annual reports of relevant enhanced human capital and improved collaboration network in relevant 4 2019 chains stakeholders, projects reports domains) to scale up fuller utilization of RTB At least 60 organizations and businesses in 10 countries invested Outcome 4.7: 60 development-focused organizations, including women's in human resources (at least 33% female beneficiaries) and networks and alliances, having increased their capacity for innovation (e.g. organizational development to scale up production and Annual reports of relevant enhanced human capital and improved collaboration network in relevant 4 2021 dissemination of nutritious RTB foods and value-added products stakeholders domains) to scale up fuller utilization of RTB Trade-offs and synergies among different SDI options for market- driven household income improvement in RTB-based farming Scientific publications and 5 2018 systems analysed in at least 15 target countries reports Outcome 5.1: Income increased by 20% for at least 550,000 HH Adoption constraints influencing the adoption of selected SDI options in RTB-related farming systems analysed and Scientific publications and 5 2018 documented in 10 countries reports Outcome 5.1: Income increased by 20% for at least 550,000 HH At least 10 multistakeholder partnerships (landscape level - region/district administrative level) supported in decision-making Annual reports and official process on RTB-based farming system intensification and document of relevant 5 2019 diversification stakeholders, study reports Outcome 5.1: Income increased by 20% for at least 550,000 HH Multistakeholder partnerships in at least 10 landscapes (region/district administrative level) promoted system Annual reports and official intensification and diversificationon options in RTB-based document of relevant 5 2021 farming stakeholders, study reports Outcome 5.1: Income increased by 20% for at least 550,000 HH SDI options identified with farmers and farm communities and expected effects on whole-farm productivity assessed in at least Scientific publications and Outcome 5.2: Whole-farm productivity increased by 25% for at least 1,000,000 5 2018 15 countries reports HH Entry-points and scaling opportunities for context specific whole- farm productivity approaches in RTB-based farming systems assessed in collaboration with key stakeholders in at least 10 Scientific publications and Outcome 5.2: Whole-farm productivity increased by 25% for at least 1,000,000 5 2019 countries reports HH Whole-farm productivity approaches included in Annual reports and official national/regional policies and development initiatives in at least document of relevant Outcome 5.2: Whole-farm productivity increased by 25% for at least 1,000,000 5 2021 10 countries stakeholders, study reports HH Options for whole-diets improvements in RTB-related farming Scientific publications and Outcome 5.3: Diet quality indices increased by 20% for at least 300,000 farmer 5 2018 systems identified and assessed in 15 countries reports households Multistakeholder platforms at regional/district level including local communities and national health/nutrition/agricultural Annual reports and official systems defined initiatives to promote adapted options for whole- document of relevant Outcome 5.3: Diet quality indices increased by 20% for at least 300,000 farmer 5 2019 diets improvements in at least 10 countries stakeholders, study reports households Annual reports and official Multistakeholder initiative implemented at regional/district for document of relevant Outcome 5.3: Diet quality indices increased by 20% for at least 300,000 farmer 5 2021 whole-diets improvements in at least 10 countries stakeholders, study reports households In at least 10 RTB-related farming systems, effects of selected SDI approaches on soil water and nutrient cycles assessed and Scientific publications and Outcome 5.4: Improved soil management practices adopted on at least 200,000 5 2019 documented reports ha cultivated by smallholder farmers SDI approaches with positive effects on soil water and nutrient Scientific publications and Outcome 5.4: Improved soil management practices adopted on at least 200,000 5 2020 cycles disseminated in at least 5 countries reports, Adoption study reports ha cultivated by smallholder farmers Households options for improving their resilience to climate risks and extremes assessed in RTB-related farming systems in 5 Scientific publications and Outcome 5.5: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 5 2017 countries reports least 500,000 HH Multistakeholder partnerships supported by RTB included expected effects on households' capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes as criterion in the analysis of alternative Annual reports of relevant Outcome 5.5: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 5 2019 options for SDI stakeholders, study reports least 500,000 HH 75% of the SDI options under dissemination were assessed for and present an expected positive effect on households' capacity Annual reports of relevant Outcome 5.5: Capacity to deal with climate risks and extremes increased for at 5 2020 to deal with climate risks and extremes stakeholders, study reports least 500,000 HH Outcome 5.6: At least 35% increase in number of female and young 50% of SDI options for market-driven household income Scientific publications and beneficiaries of at least 200,000 HH perceive to have better control over assets 5 2019 improvement assessed using gender-responsive approaches reports and resources Outcome 5.6: At least 35% increase in number of female and young Equitable SDI options for market-driven household income Annual reports of relevant beneficiaries of at least 200,000 HH perceive to have better control over assets 5 2021 improvement under implementation in at least 5 countries stakeholders, study reports and resources Outcome 5.7: RTB delivery flagships and at least 55 research and development partner organizations with more gender-responsive planning and At least 10% increase of female scientists participating in key- implementation processes, reflected in at least 5 additional collaborative decision-making processes concerning RTB interventions and arrangements with public sector and civil society organizations supporting 5 2018 strategies Project and Program reports gender transformation 185 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Performance Indicators Matrix Table D Annex 10 F Outcome 5.7: RTB delivery flagships and at least 55 research and development partner organizations with more gender-responsive planning and At least 20% increase of female scientists participating in key- implementation processes, reflected in at least 5 additional collaborative decision-making processes concerning RTB interventions and arrangements with public sector and civil society organizations supporting 5 2020 strategies Project and Program reports gender transformation At least 1 systems innovation coalition established in each Annual reports of Innovation Outcome 5.8: At least 66 cases where RTB crops/technologies are newly country selected for site integration and problem identification Coalitions and relevant included in policies or programs executed by government agencies, NGOs, 5 2017 and prioritization exercises conducted stakeholders and/or private sector At least 44 bi-annual stakeholder meetings held across target countries for co-design of impact pathways and M&EL around Outcome 5.8: At least 66 cases where RTB crops/technologies are newly implementation, including needs assessment and customized included in policies or programs executed by government agencies, NGOs, 5 2017 product development Project and Program reports and/or private sector Annual reports of Innovation Outcome 5.8: At least 66 cases where RTB crops/technologies are newly At least 1 systems innovation coalition per action site experiment Coalitions and relevant included in policies or programs executed by government agencies, NGOs, 5 2018 with prioritized alternative interventions options. stakeholders and/or private sector At least 44 bi-annual stakeholder meetings held across target countries for co-design of impact pathways and M&EL around Outcome 5.8: At least 66 cases where RTB crops/technologies are newly implementation, including needs assessment and customized included in policies or programs executed by government agencies, NGOs, 5 2019 product development Project and Program reports and/or private sector At least 1 systems innovation coalition per action site participates Annual reports of Innovation Outcome 5.8: At least 66 cases where RTB crops/technologies are newly in trade-off analysis between selected alternative interventions Coalitions and relevant included in policies or programs executed by government agencies, NGOs, 5 2020 options stakeholders and/or private sector At least 44 bi-annual stakeholder meetings held across target countries for co-design of impact pathways and M&EL around Outcome 5.8: At least 66 cases where RTB crops/technologies are newly implementation, including needs assessment and customized included in policies or programs executed by government agencies, NGOs, 5 2021 product development Project and Program reports and/or private sector Outcome 5.9: At least 1,500 research/development staff in RTB and in mixed- type partner organizations across prime target countries with strengthened 50 individuals (50% female) trained through long term programs research and innovation capacities including gender-responsive and 5 2018 (e.g.MSc and PhD students) Project and Program reports transformative research Outcome 5.9: At least 1,500 research/development staff in RTB and in mixed- Gender and youth capacity development strategies and training Project and Program reports, type partner organizations across prime target countries with strengthened materials developed and/or adapted in collaboartion with key Annual reports of relevant research and innovation capacities including gender-responsive and 5 2019 partners in 10 countries partners transformative research Outcome 5.9: At least 1,500 research/development staff in RTB and in mixed- type partner organizations across prime target countries with strengthened 100 individuals (50% female) trained through long term programs research and innovation capacities including gender-responsive and 5 2020 (e.g.MSc and PhD students) Project and Program reports transformative research Outcome 5.9: At least 1,500 research/development staff in RTB and in mixed- At least 1,500 users of RTB knowledge sharing mechanisms with Project and Program reports, type partner organizations across prime target countries with strengthened strengthened capacity for designing, implementing and assessing Annual reports of relevant research and innovation capacities including gender-responsive and 5 2021 RTB research stakeholders and partners transformative research Scientific publications and Outcome 5.10: At least 5 partnership and scaling models tested in a minimum 5 2017 Comparative assessment of scaling models (desk study) reports of 5 target countries and adjusted to be fit for purpose At least 2 ex-post impact assessments using low-cost methods based on expert workshops covering at least 6 crop-country combinations, to be undertaken in target countries with regard to varietal adoption, changes in agronomic practices, and other Scientific publications and Outcome 5.10: At least 5 partnership and scaling models tested in a minimum 5 2018 key areas of agrifood systems reports of 5 target countries and adjusted to be fit for purpose Design principles for at least 5 partnership and scaling models in Scientific publications and Outcome 5.10: At least 5 partnership and scaling models tested in a minimum 5 2018 a minimum of 5 target countries defined reports of 5 target countries and adjusted to be fit for purpose At least 3 new ex-post impact assessments using low-cost methods based on expert workshops covering at least 9 crop- country combinations, to be undertaken in target countries with regard to varietal adoption, changes in agronomic practices, and Scientific publications and Outcome 5.10: At least 5 partnership and scaling models tested in a minimum 5 2018 other key areas of agrifood systems reports of 5 target countries and adjusted to be fit for purpose At least 17 research and development partner organizations (5 Project and Program reports, regional and 12 national) in target regions and countries applying Annual reports of relevant elements of foresight and priority assessment approaches in stakeholders and partners, Outcome 5.10: At least 5 partnership and scaling models tested in a minimum 5 2019 strategic planning Surveys of 5 target countries and adjusted to be fit for purpose At least 5 new ex-post impact assessments using low-cost methods based on expert workshops covering at least 15 crop- country combinations, to be undertaken in target countries with regard to varietal adoption, changes in agronomic practices, and Scientific publications and Outcome 5.10: At least 5 partnership and scaling models tested in a minimum 5 2020 other key areas of agrifood systems reports of 5 target countries and adjusted to be fit for purpose Performance of at least 5 partnership and scaling models in a minimum of 5 target countries assessed, and cross-country Outcome 5.10: At least 5 partnership and scaling models tested in a minimum 5 2021 experiences shared Study reports, Project reports of 5 target countries and adjusted to be fit for purpose Scientific publications and Outcome 5.10: At least 5 partnership and scaling models tested in a minimum 5 2022 At least 5 large-scale and rigorous impact studies conducted reports of 5 target countries and adjusted to be fit for purpose 186 RTB Proposal 2017–2022 Vol. II