Scaling Strategy Workshop: Assessing Challenges and Opportunities for Scaling Socio-Technical Innovations in Mixed Farming Systems of Nepal's Mid-Hills Sanju Koirala1, Powell Mponela2, Sagar Kafle2, Jibesh KC1, Lokendra Khadka2, Pankaj Koirala2, Manohara Khadka1 Author affiliation 1International Water Management Institute (IWMI) and 2International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT) Published by International Water Management Institute December, 2024 The Mixed Farming Systems Initiative aims to provide equitable, transformative pathways for improved livelihoods of actors in mixed farming systems through sustainable intensification within target agroecologies and socio-economic settings. Through action research and development partnerships, the Initiative will improve smallholder farmers' resilience to weather-induced shocks, provide a more stable income and significant benefits in welfare, and enhance social justice and inclusion for 13 million people by 2030. Activities will be implemented in six focus countries globally representing diverse mixed farming systems as follows: Ghana (cereal–root crop mixed), Ethiopia (highland mixed), Malawi: (maize mixed), Bangladesh (rice mixed), Nepal (highland mixed), and Lao People's Democratic Republic (upland intensive mixed/ highland extensive mixed). © 2024 This publication is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0. Unless otherwise noted, you are free to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format), adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) for any purpose, even commercially, under the following conditions: ATTRIBUTION. The work must be attributed, but not in any way that suggests endorsement by the publisher or the author(s). https://www.cgiar.org/initiative/19-sustainable-intensification-of-mixed-farming-systems https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 Abbreviations AKC Agriculture Knowledge Center CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center DoAR Directorate of Agricultural Research GESI Gender Equality and Social Inclusion IPSR Innovation Packaging and Scaling Readiness IWMI International Water Management Institute IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture IWMI International Water Management Institute JTA Junior Technical Assistant LI-BIRD Local Initiatives for Biodiversity, Research and Development MFS Mixed Farming Systems MoLMAC Ministry of Land Management, Agriculture and Cooperative MSAKH Multi-stakeholder Agriculture Knowledge Hub PMAMP Prime-minister Agriculture Modernization Project WEIA Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index WTHC Warm Temperate Horticulture Center Table of Contents Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 1 Background .............................................................................................................................................................................. 5 1.1 Overview of Mixed Farming Systems .......................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Nepal’s context ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Stakeholder demand and participation .................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Innovation Packaging and Scaling Readiness Workshop ............................................................. 7 2 Scaling Strategy Workshop Details .......................................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Scaling Strategy Workshop ............................................................................................................................... 9 2.2 Objective of the workshops .............................................................................................................................. 10 2.3 Sessions: Identifying Barriers and Enables for Innovation Scaling .......................................... 11 2.4 Stakeholder Discussion Guide ......................................................................................................................... 11 3 Challenges and Opportunities for scaling Multistakeholder Agriculture Knowledge Hub13 3.1 Background ................................................................................................................................................................ 13 3.2 Stakeholder Discussion Summary ............................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Key Takeaways .......................................................................................................................................................... 16 4 Challenges and Opportunities for scaling the micro-irrigation practices in Khotang and Surkhet ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 18 4.1 Background ................................................................................................................................................................ 18 4.2 Stakeholder Discussion Summary ............................................................................................................... 19 4.3 Key Takeaways ......................................................................................................................................................... 22 5 Challenges and Opportunities for scaling Improved fodder (Napier) for mid-hill smallholder mixed farming systems ............................................................................................................................... 24 5.1 Background ............................................................................................................................................................... 24 5.2 Stakeholder discussion summary ............................................................................................................... 24 5.3 Key Takeaways ......................................................................................................................................................... 30 6 Challenges and Opportunities for scaling High value fruits trees for mid-hills smallholder in mixed farming systems ....................................................................................................................................................... 31 6.1 Background ................................................................................................................................................................ 31 6.2 Stakeholder discussion summary ................................................................................................................ 31 Key Takeaways .......................................................................................................................................................................... 35 7 Conclusion and next steps ........................................................................................................................................... 36 8 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................................ 37 9 Annexes .................................................................................................................................................................................... 38 9.1 Annex 1: List of participants of workshop at Gurbhakot Municipality, Khotang ........... 38 9.2 Annex 3: List of participants of workshop at Halesi Tuwachung Municipality, Khotang ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 40 1 Background 1.1 Overview of Mixed Farming Systems Mixed farming system (MFS) is predominant in the global south. Mixed crop- livestock systems are estimated to cover about 2.5 billion ha of land globally and, in the developing world, they supply around 75% of milk, 60% of meat, and 41–86% of cereals consumed (Herrero et al., 2010). In MFS, farmers integrate crops, trees, and livestock systems to diversify risk from single-crop production, use labor efficiently, access cash, and add value to products. MFS has the potential to maintain ecosystem function and health, and to help prevent agricultural systems from becoming fragile (Holling, 1995). However, key drivers of change- population pressure, urbanization, migration, climate change, water scarcity, changing eating habits, and unstable food prices are deepening inequalities in resource access. All these drivers are obstructing progress towards achieving sustainable development goals (Herrero et al., 2010). To improve the overall performance and sustainability of MFS, their sustainable intensification requires integrated systems research to identify context-specific pathways toward efficient, resilient, and scalable MFS that preserve natural capital and offer equitable benefits for all (Hoeschle-Zeledon et al., 2021). The Sustainable Intensification (i.e., production of more food on the same piece of land while reducing the negative environmental impacts) of Mixed Farming Systems can deliver critical outcomes that result in multiple impacts at scale, minimize sectoral trade-offs and leverage/maximize synergies in MFS (Hoeschle-Zeledon et al., 2021). The CGIAR’s Initiative on Mixed Farming System (SI-MFS) aims to address these challenges through sustainable intensification of mixed crop-tree-livestock systems to deliver more productive and equitable livelihoods, along with reduced environmental footprint. SI-MFS intends to provide gender-transformative pathways to achieve this goal by deploying locally viable socio-technical innovations that will maximize synergies and minimize trade-offs between the systems’ biophysical and social components (Hoeschle-Zeledon et al., 2021). 1.2 Nepal’s context In Nepal, small and medium holder farmers practicing a mixed farming system (MFS) dominates the agriculture practices. Farmers follow multiple cropping practices integrating crops with vegetables, fruits and raising livestock. This system typically involves strong integration where livestock provides manure for crop production and crop residues provide feed for livestock. MFS is primarily practiced in rain-fed environments on fragmented land in the mid-hills and the mountains (Neupane and Koirala, 2023). In the Nepalese context, the needs of farmers practicing MFS are overlooked prioritizing commercial farming by providing subsidies to promote mono-cropping, the use of herbicides, and improved crop varieties. Policies, institutions, and technologies are also designed for adult male farmers giving less attention to the needs, challenges, and priorities of women and elderly farmers. Further, inadequate investment, infrastructure, agro-advisory tools, underdeveloped markets, labor shortage, climate-induced risks, and weak agriculture governance foster challenges to MFS. As a result, farmers’ interest in agriculture is decreasing whilst attracting them to non-agriculture sectors (Koirala and Neupane, 2023). This indicates a pressing need to rethink the existing agriculture system. In the context of growing labor migration, feminization of agriculture and increased fallow land, mixed farming systems (MFS) can be a vital strategy. MFS has the potential to enhance the current mixed farming system by utilizing the same quantity of natural resources and employing effective crop management and animal husbandry techniques. With policy, program, and technological interventions, MFS may provide an important opportunity to upscale agroecological innovations and improve the livelihoods of resource-poor farmers (Neupane and Koirala, 2023). Within this context, In Nepal, the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) and the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT) are conducting action research on SI-MFS in Gurbhakot Municipality, Surkhet district and Halesi Tuwachung Municipality, Khotang district. These mid-hill regions of Nepal were selected as they are prone to drought. The research began in 2022 and is intended to be completed by 2025. 1.3 Stakeholder demand and participation In December 2022, group discussions and in-depth interviews were held with farmers, and relevant stakeholders in both areas with the objective of understanding the farming system, farmer’s needs, opportunities, and challenges of agricultural practices in the area. Based on these discussions, the team made a list of eight potential technical innovation bundles. These innovation bundles are listed in the table below. Table 1: Potential technical interventions identified by stakeholders during the project inception phase S.No Interventions S.No. Interventions A Water Related Interventions 5 Promotion of local indigenous crops 1 Improving water availability for multiple use C Livestock and Fodder/forage related interventions 2 Improving irrigation efficiency 6 Livestock and fodder/forage improvement, maize-legume, desmodium-potato intensification B Alternative crops related interventions 7 Improved Shed and manure management 3 Deep-rooted fruits/Orchard Intensification D Improving agricultural technologies/techniques interventions 4 Introduction of high-value crops 8 Introducing agro-mechanical equipment During April 2023 visit, the farmers selected the top three interventions from the list depending on their interest and needs. In both areas, most of the women and men farmers ranked improving water availability through water conservation practices such as multiple water use systems, drip irrigation, mulching and sprinkle irrigation as the topmost priority innovations. Based on conversation with farmers and internal discussion with teams, the research team came up with the following innovations to be packaged and piloted: a) Micro-irrigation practices to increase water use efficiency in mid-hill based mixed farming systems of Nepal b) Improved fodder (Napier) for mid-hill smallholder mixed farming systems to improve dairy livestock productivity for milk, reduce erosion, and restore degraded lands. c) High-value fruit trees for mid-hill smallholder mixed farming systems to improve household nutrition and income diversity. d) Multi-stakeholder platforms. Innovations on micro-irrigation and improved (fodder/fruits) were piloted with 125 farmers in two districts including 76 women farmers. Women farmers demonstrate higher participation in both municipalities, with a notable gender gap in Gurbhakot Municipality where women's involvement significantly surpasses men's (Error! Reference source not found.). . Figure 1: Gender-based comparison of participation in action research in Gurbhakot and Halesi Tuwachung Municipality. 1.4 Innovation Packaging and Scaling Readiness Workshop Prior to scaling strategy workshop held in 2024, the Innovation Packaging and Scaling Readiness (IPSR) workshop on micro-irrigation, fodder and multi- stakeholder platforms was conducted from 15- 16 August 2023 in Halesi Tuwachung Municipality, Khotang and 23-24 August 2023 in Gurbhakot Municipality, Surkhet. The workshops aimed to identify the barriers, challenges, and solutions for bundling and scaling innovations. Local, Provincial and Federal stakeholders including farmers, local representatives, municipality representatives/staffs, Provincial/Federal government officers from concerned ministries, co-operatives representatives etc. participated in the workshop. Following the workshop, the innovations were packaged as follows: • Formation of MSAKH, along with sensitization discussions on gender roles and responsibilities in agricultural practices, trust-building, and networking • Training in micro-irrigation practices+ distribution of micro irrigation tools piloting+ vegetable/ fruit farming 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Women Men Women Men Gurbhakot Municipality Halesi Tuwachung Municipality N u m b er o f F ar m er s • Improved fodder (Napier) for mid-hill smallholder mixed farming systems to improve dairy livestock productivity for milk, reduce erosion, and restore degraded lands. • High value fruit trees for mid-hill smallholder mixed farming systems to improve household nutrition and income diversity According to reflections from the IPSR workshop, female farmers face several barriers in accessing tools and technologies, including limited financial resources and insufficient knowledge of micro-irrigation practices and improved fodder types. As a result, the innovations were paired with training to help farmers pilot them on their farms. Similarly, members of MSAKH received entrepreneurship training, along with discussions on gender role division and trust-building. The piloting was also supported by social mobilizers at both MSF sites. Municipality representatives were informed about the challenges related to the innovative packaging and scaling of these initiatives. They were encouraged to revise policies and guidelines to better support the adoption and expansion of these innovations. 2 Scaling Strategy Workshop Details 2.1 Scaling Strategy Workshop Figure 2: Participants of Scaling Strategy Workshop in Gurbhakot, Surkhet (Photo credit: IWMI) Since 2022, stakeholders have been involved in piloting the innovations. In 2023, using the IPSR approach, the stakeholders conducted a review and reflection workshop to discuss innovation packaging and at the end of 3 years project, they discussed challenges and identified solutions for development of a Scaling Strategy. During a field visit, farmers shared positive feedback as well as challenges they encountered while piloting the innovations. In response, a Scaling Strategy Workshop was held to discuss these challenges, the barriers faced, and potential solutions for expanding the innovations to other farms within their wards and across other wards of the municipality. The Scaling Strategy Workshop took place in Gurbhakot Municipality on November 13–14, 2024, and in Halesi Tuwachung Municipality on November 18–19, 2024. A total of 42 stakeholders participated in the Gurbhakot Municipality workshop, including 15 women and 27 men. In Halesi Tuwachung, Khotang, 38 stakeholders participated, including 10 women and 18 men (Figure 3). Figure 3: Participant details from the Scaling Strategy Workshop in Surkhet and Khotang districts. The participants in both municipalities represented a diverse range of groups, such as ward and municipality representatives, staff, federal and provincial government officials, NGO staff, farmers, and other key stakeholders. The workshops in both municipalities were chaired by the respective mayors. Figure 4: The mayors of Gurbhakot and Halesi Tuwachung Municipality shared the lessons from MFS during opening remarks at Scaling Strategy Workshops at respective municipalities. (Photo credit: IWMI) 2.2 Objective of the workshops 1. Gain deeper insights into the challenges in piloting the innovations on micro- irrigation practices, improved fodder, fruit cultivation, and MSAKH and discuss potential problems and solutions for scaling them. 2. Elicit complementary innovations to co-design potential scaling strategies for the above-mentioned innovations with the local stakeholders. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Surkhet Khotang N u m b er o f F ar m er s Women Men Total 2.3 Sessions: Identifying Barriers and Enables for Innovation Scaling Participants were engaged in a series of interactive sessions to analyze and improve the scaling potential of innovations. The workshop covered various aspects of innovative scaling, including identifying barriers, challenges, and solutions for scaling them. Attendees participated in plenary presentations, discussions, and breakout group work to share their experiences and views on innovation scaling. Observing the male participants' domination in the group discussions, a separate group for female stakeholders was formed for the group work. The agenda of the workshop is included in Annex (1). Following the IPSR framework, the discussion was centered around the themes mentioned below: i) Challenges related to the core innovation ii) Beneficiaries’ user awareness of core innovation iii) Beneficiary/user confidence/trust in core innovation iv) Availability and Beneficiary/User's access to core innovation v) Beneficiary/user access to finance/ affordability of the core innovation vi) Compatibility of core innovation with existing farming / market / policy systems or business models vii) Beneficiary/ user capacity and knowhow to appropriately use the core innovation viii) Gender equality and social inclusion (GESI) related to scaling the core innovation ix) Legal conditions and governance required to scale the core innovation (by- laws, policies, regulations and business models x) Stakeholder coordination and scaling partnerships The summaries of the sessions on each innovation are in Chapter III (Multi- stakeholder knowledge hub), Chapter IV (Micro-irrigation practices), Chapter V (Improved fodder), and Chapter VI (High value fruits).. It is also important to note that some of the points stated by the local stakeholders were refined or elaborated by the facilitators. Hence, this report contains the views of local stakeholders and the research team. 2.4 Stakeholder Discussion Guide During the workshop, a plenary presentation on each innovation was followed by a general discussion on the existing problems and opportunities. Participants were then divided into four groups: (i) women farmers, (ii) male farmers, (iii) private sector representatives (Agrovet/cold storage/nursery growers/machinery dealers), and (iv) government policymakers, decision-makers, and researchers (at the Palika, ward, municipality, regional, and national levels). Each group discussed and presented the barriers and solutions for scaling the core innovation, focusing on the two areas from the following areas: i) Beneficiaries’ user awareness of core innovation ii) Beneficiary/user confidence/trust in core innovation iii) Availability and Beneficiary/User's access to core innovation iv) Beneficiary/user access to finance/ affordability of the core innovation v) Compatibility of core innovation with existing farming/market / policy systems or business models vi) Beneficiary/ user capacity and knowhow to appropriately use the core innovation vii) Gender equality and social inclusion related to scaling the core innovation viii) Legal conditions and governance required to scale the core innovation (by-laws, policies, regulations, and business models ix) Stakeholder coordination and scaling partnerships. 3 Challenges and Opportunities for scaling Multistakeholder Agriculture Knowledge Hub 3.1 Background During consultations with farmers and municipality/ward representatives, it is observed that there is a gap in both formal and informal institutions that unite and serve as a common platform for local stakeholders to discuss problems, challenges, and opportunities, and share knowledge related to the agricultural sector. To address this gap, Multistakeholder Agriculture Knowledge Hubs (MSAKHs) were established in Halesi Tuwachung Municipality, Khotang, and Gurbhakot Municipality, Surkhet, with the objective to: • Establish a participatory platform to engage a wide range of local stakeholders, including women, Dalit, and other disadvantaged groups, in dialogue, decision-making, and collaborative implementation of activities related to Mixed Farming Systems (MFS). • Serve as an information hub for diverse aspects of mixed farming systems, such as cultivation techniques, post-harvest processes, and market-related information. • Create a forum to share indigenous and scientific knowledge, experiences, and successful best practices from other regions. This will ensure a coordinated approach to adopting and scaling socio-technical innovations that meet farmers' needs—while also considering the preferences of female farmers—and are suitable for the local context. • Conduct advocacy campaigns to update agricultural provisions in line with the needs of stakeholders, including diverse farmer groups, agro- entrepreneurs, and the private sector. • Provide capacity-building training and conduct awareness campaigns for stakeholders on relevant topics tailored to their roles and needs. • Monitor and document agriculture-related activities—such as trainings, input distributions, and other initiatives—carried out by municipalities, INGOs, NGOs, and academic institutions in the area. • Facilitate the upscaling of MFS through policy advocacy and resource mobilization. In March 2024, the MSAKHs were established in Ward 6 and 7 of Halesi Tuwachung Municipality, and Ward 12 and 14 of Gurbhakot Municipality, in the presence of the research team, social mobilizers, municipality staff, and ward chairpersons. The stakeholders selected the chairpersons of the hubs through a participatory process. The stakeholders involved in the hubs include subsistence farmers, small-scale agriculture and livestock entrepreneurs, financial cooperative staff, members of community forest user groups, local-level agrotechnicians, agro-vet owners, cold storage owners, and others. 3.2 Stakeholder Discussion Summary The group identified inadequate time to participate in the hub's activities and a lack of financial resources to operate the MSAKH as major challenges for scaling the initiative. Another concern raised by the participants was the difficulty in reaching common solutions to problems. They noted that varying needs, interests, and political ideologies among stakeholders could make it challenging to reach a consensus. Additionally, they mentioned challenges in engaging technical experts, who may not be available to attend every meeting. To address these issues, they suggested holding in-person meetings every 2-3 months, with information and knowledge being shared throughout the year. The participants strongly urged the municipality/ward to take a leading role in facilitating the MSAKH and support its formalization under the Ward/Municipality. They also recommended using municipal resources, such as halls, telephones, and human resources, to reduce the long-term costs of operating the MSAKH. Furthermore, they suggested that many local farmers and stakeholders are unaware of the platform, so promoting the MSAKH to local communities, as well as to stakeholders at the ward, municipality, provincial, and federal levels, would help attract diverse actors and facilitate scaling. The participants emphasized the importance of encouraging participation from women and marginalized groups, creating an inclusive environment where they can meaningfully engage and represent the group. They also suggested that the Ward/Municipality develop a supportive environment for the MSAKH by implementing policies, such as providing incentives to MSAKH members, to help it thrive. Table 2: Problems and solution analysis of scaling MSAKH Problems / Barriers Solutions / Enablers Challenges related to the scaling of core innovation Problems/barriers ▪ Lack of time to participate in the hub's activities. ▪ Lack of financial resources to run the MSAKH ▪ MSAKH has not been formalized yet- it needs to to registered. ▪ Difficulty reaching consensus on common solutions to some problems ▪ Experts may not attend every meeting Solutions / Enablers ▪ In-person meetings should be held every 2- 3 months, with information sharing conducted via WhatsApp or other messaging platforms ▪ The Municipality/Ward should take lead in running and facilitating the MSAKH- with or without its formal registration ▪ Municipal/Ward resources shall be used to organize meetings ▪ Promoting the MSAKH by highlighting the benefits of membership to attract a diverse range of participants Beneficiaries’ user awareness of core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Many locals are unaware of the MSAKH ▪ Locals may have unrealistic Solutions / Enablers ▪ Clearly communicate the objectives and benefits of the MSAKH to the local community. expectations, especting subsidies or direct inputs from MSAKH Beneficiary/user confidence/trust in core innovation Confidence/Trust: Problems / Barriers ▪ Different groups exist in the local level—hence, some do not want to be members of many groups ▪ Project based-nature of the initiative, with concerns about sustainability Solutions / Enablers ▪ Promote the benefits of being member of MSAKH ▪ Encourage the municipality/ward to take ownership of the MSAKH Availability and Beneficiary/User's access to core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Time constraints preventing the participation in MSAKH meetings. ▪ Travel time to meeting locations ▪ Multiple work responsibilities hindering participation Solutions / Enablers ▪ Bio-monthly or quaterly meetings ▪ Beneficiaries shall decide their own meeting schedule/calender in participatory ways ▪ Meetings can be held on a rotational basis at diffent locations Beneficiary/user access to finance/ affordability of the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Lack of finaicial resources to organize MSAKH meetings ▪ Insuffucuent funds for organizing sharing programs Solutions / Enablers ▪ Financial and other resources support to organize MSAKH meetings. ▪ Use Ward/Municipal halls for meetings ▪ The Municipality/Ward shall take ownership of the MSAKH. Compatibility of core innovation with existing farming/market / policy systems or business models Problems / Barriers ▪ Limited understanding of the importance of MSAKH among various stakeholders, including local, provincial, and national policy makers, market players, and financial insitutions. Solutions / Enablers ▪ The Ward/ Municipality should develop policies to expand/sthrengthen the MSAKH ▪ Share MSAKH objectives and benefits with key stakeholders, including local, provincial, and national policymakers, market players, and relevant institutions. Beneficiary/ user capacity and knowhow to appropriately use the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Lack of guiding documents for the MSAKH’s operations ▪ Inadequate skills for leading such innovation ▪ Limited networks to connect with diverse actors Solutions / Enablers ▪ Develop guideline for the MSAKHs operations ▪ IProvide leadership and soft skills training to group members. ▪ Organize exposure visits to build experience and knowledge. Gender equality and social inclusion related to scaling the core innovation Problems / Barriers Solutions / Enablers ▪ Time constraint for female members to attend meetings ▪ Least intrested to lead the MSAKH ▪ In adequate leadership skills of female members to lead MSAKH ▪ Dalits and other socially excluded groups may have barriers attend the meeting ▪ Encourage women and socially excluded groups to attend the meeting actively and also take leadership roles ▪ Organize meetings in the time and place convinient for women. ▪ Create an inclusive environment where all stakeholders can participate with degnity. Dailts and other excluded group shall be encouraged to participate while those who desciminate on the basis of caste, age, gender, class should be penalized in certain ways. Legal conditions and governance required to scale the core innovation (by-laws, policies, regulations and business models) Problems / Barriers ▪ Conflict or misunderstanding among group members. ▪ Diverse political ideologies among stakeholders may cause conflict ▪ Political interference may occur ▪ Lack of policies to supports scaling of MSAKH Solutions / Enablers ▪ Conflict management related discussions to be held among stakeholders ▪ The Wards/Municipality shall create conducive environment for the platform to function. ▪ Encourage such platforms my providing incentives to its members. Stakeholder coordination and scaling partnerships Problems / Barriers ▪ Lack of trust among stakeholders ▪ Stakeholders may not be motivated to take ownership and scale the MSAKH ▪ Municipality/ward may be reluctant to scale the hub Solutions / Enablers ▪ Conduct -trust building sessions. Clarification on the objective, purpose and benefits of MSAKH ▪ Some exemplary activities must be conducted to demonstrate the benefits of being member of MSAKH 3.3 Key Takeaways 1. Regular Meetings & Information Sharing: Organize bi-monthly or quarterly in- person meetings and share information through platforms like WhatsApp or other messaging apps. Ensure continuous engagement, information sharing, and discussion among stakeholders. 2. Awareness programs: Conduct awareness programs to raise awareness about MSAKH’s objectives, benefits, and membership advantages in within and outside the wards for scaling MSAKH. This will help to increase local understanding and attract more participants, addressing unrealistic expectations and improving overall awareness. In addition, showcase case studies/best practices of multi stakeholder platforms to demonstrate the tangible benefits of being a member of MSAKH. This will increase stakeholder buy-in and involvement in MSAKH activities. 3. Leadership and Capacity Building: Provide leadership and soft skills training for members, especially targeting marginalized groups and women. This will help in strengthening local leadership and ensure sustainability through capacity building. 4. Rotating Meeting Locations & Flexible Scheduling: Organize meetings in different locations on a rotating basis and allow beneficiaries to create their own meeting schedules. This will ensure improved accessibility and attendance by accommodating time and travel constraints. 5. Financial Support & Resource Mobilization Seek financial support from the Ward/Municipality and utilize municipal facilities for meetings and programs to address financial constraints and ensure resources are available for organizing events and programs. 6. Policy Advocacy Register MSAKH under Municipality or Wards. Advocate for supportive policies at the municipal and provincial levels to strengthen MSAKH and ensure its alignment with local market and policy systems. The objective is to ensure long-term sustainability and recognition of MSAGH within the broader system. 7. Conflict Resolution and Trust-Building Organize conflict management workshops and trust-building sessions with stakeholders to build a stronger, more cooperative environment among stakeholders. 8. Inclusion & Gender Equality Initiatives Encourage active participation from women and marginalized groups and create a safe, inclusive space for all members. Promote gender equality and social inclusion, ensuring diverse representation in decision-making processes. 9. Exposure Visits & Networking Opportunities Organize exposure visits and networking events for members to build connections with diverse actors and share best practices. This will expand beneficiaries' networks and improve their ability to use the core innovation effectively. 4 Challenges and Opportunities for scaling the micro-irrigation practices in Khotang and Surkhet 4.1 Background Introducing micro-irrigation in the localities aims to bridge the knowledge gap regarding this technology. While farmers practice various efficient water management interventions at both communal and household levels, micro- irrigation remains an area where the capacity to design and use it effectively at the household level is limited. Micro-irrigation tools exemplify efficient water management technologies, including rainwater harvesting, multi-water use systems, conservation farming practices such as mulching, and spring water conservation. A comprehensive approach has been followed to improve the design, implementation, and scaling of micro-irrigation technologies to better serve water- constrained households in mid-hill regions. Integrating micro-irrigation with rainwater harvesting, multi-water use systems, and conservation farming practices is essential to fully realize the benefits of this technology, ensuring sustainable and efficient water use. To address this, sprinkler irrigation tools have been provided to all treatment farmers for irrigating vegetables, fodder, fruit, and other crops. Drip irrigation tools, however, are specifically supplied to households where water is a major constraint and where farmers are willing to cultivate, or are already cultivating, vegetables and fruits while maintaining appropriate spacing between plants, and considering socio-economic criteria. The selection of micro-irrigation tools with innovative small irrigation technologies, specifically drip and sprinkler irrigation systems, is based on farmers’ preferences and technical suitability for research sites. While many farmers have some prior knowledge of micro-irrigation tools, the proper and consistent use of these systems is still lacking across the research sites. Figure 5: Mr. Jibesh KC, Research Officer, IWMI Nepal, presenting micro-irrigation Innovation in the scaling strategy workshop at Halesi, Khotang (Photo credit: IWMI) 4.2 Stakeholder Discussion Summary Micro-irrigation practices, including drip and sprinkler systems, aim to enhance water use efficiency in Nepal's mid-hill mixed farming systems. However, stakeholders identified several challenges, including tool limitations such as drip pipe clogging, insufficient drip tank capacity, and unsuitability of the technologies for uneven terrain. Limited farmer awareness, high costs, inadequate subsidies, and poor market access are further identified as the constrain for adoption. Group discussions also highlighted that women and marginalized groups face additional barriers in accessing financial and technical resources. Proposed solutions identified by groups include revising tool designs, providing hands-on training, and establishing model farms to raise awareness. Enhancing financial accessibility through subsidies, micro-loans, and agro-vet support was also emphasized in the plenary presentations. Strengthening local supply chains, subsidy provision processes, and integrating micro-irrigation into local policies were recommended for effective scaling. Table 3: Problems and Solution Analysis of Micro Irrigation Practices Problems / Barriers Solutions / Enablers Challenges related to the core innovation Problems/barriers ▪ The problem of clogging, requires continuous filtration of the pipe ▪ Drudgery in removing mulching while using the sprinkler. ▪ Tank capacity in the available drip irrigation kit is not sufficient for vegetable production especially during later stage of their growth. ▪ The drip technology is not effective for all kinds of crops i.e. only to cabbage and cauliflower. ▪ Problem in integrating drip irrigation and Solutions / Enablers ▪ Revisiting the tools by the local suppliers, research, and development partners to further enhance the precision and applicability of the micro- irrigation tools. ▪ Technical specifications of the current models to be revisited. mulching ▪ Sprinkler irrigation is not appropriate and bothersome for medium to large-scale farming. ▪ After producing vegetables, we are currently facing problems due to pests and diseases. ▪ Drip-fruit integration sometimes, sometime drips are cut when doing weeding and cleaning. Beneficiaries’ user awareness of core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Farmers do not have adequate information on the use and installation of micro- irrigation tools for increasing family income through additional production of seasonal vegetables. ▪ Lack of awareness of water conservation techniques including waste and excess water conservation Solutions / Enablers ▪ Result in demonstration or model farm concepts should be employed to increase awareness among farmers. ▪ Exposure visits to successful commercial farms that utilize micro-irrigation tools and water conservation techniques should be arranged integrating with hands-on training. Beneficiary/user confidence/trust in core innovation Confidence/Trust: Problems / Barriers ▪ No big issues in sprinkler irrigation but drip irrigation demands huge money and technical skills. ▪ Unable to use it in multiple crops. ▪ Because the market is not ensured, farmers are reluctant to use micro-irrigation tools to produce in surplus. ▪ Agriculture product insurance is not in practice Solutions / Enablers. ▪ Assurance of the market for selling the vegetables produced from the farms through market- led production strategies. ▪ This will help to increase the demand for micro-irrigation tools. Availability and Beneficiary/User's access to core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Sprinkler is easily available in local agro- vets, but drip irrigation kits are not sufficiently available. Because of low demand, agro-vets only stock the drip irrigation kits when they receive orders from the farmers or extension offices. ▪ Because the drip set is expensive, farmers' access is limited unless supported by government offices. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Focus on commercial vegetable farming in mid-hills automatically increases the demand for micro- irrigation tools. ▪ Agrovets need to devise market penetration strategies including the use of social media, technical backstopping in the field, and utilizing local agents. Beneficiary/user access to finance/ affordability of the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Limited subsidy available for micro- irrigation because of resource-constraints. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Micro-loans should be arranged for the smallholder farmers ▪ No availability of low interest agricultural loans from banks and expensive interest rates in cooperatives and micro-finance. ▪ Low valuation of land properties as a collateral for the credit purpose from banks. ▪ Agrovets are not eligible to get subsidized loan schemes unless registered in the name of woman ▪ Low awareness of budget allocation process in municipality ▪ Lack of agriculture insurance required for integrated farming that includes using micro- irrigation tools. ▪ Agrovets for the specific purpose like promoting micro-irrigation tools should be supported with discounted interest rate loans so that micro-irrigation tools become readily available at lcoal market. ▪ Opportunity for municipality to coordinate with Banks through Agriculture Knowledge Center, Diktel Compatibility of core innovation with existing farming / market / policy systems or business models Problems / Barriers ▪ Not sufficient production of vegetables for cold storage ▪ Require high volume of water for sprinkler which is difficult to manage in areas facing acute water scarcity. ▪ Problem of breakage of drip delivery pipes when cutting the grasses for forage purpose. ▪ Difficulty in drip installation due to slopy farmland. ▪ Uneven farmlands create difficulty to use drip and splinkler ▪ The tendency to import irrigation material from outside the district at cheaper prices has not only distorted the local market but also the distributed equipment or tools under governmenr subsidy program have not been used to their full potential due to the lack of after-sales service ▪ Local market is not able to consume all the seasonal vegetable and there is poor network and linkage with neighboring districts for supply of vegetables Solutions / Enablers ▪ Collection centers should be established and operationalized to collect vegetable products at enough quantity so that cold storage facilities are best utilized. ▪ Ideas on appropriate installation and utilization of irrigation kits should be disseminated adquately to the users. ▪ Local suppliers should be prioritized for the purchase of tools by the government support programs. Beneficiary/ user capacity and knowhow to appropriately use the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Farmers’ lack of knowledge on installation and maintenance of drip irrigation system and in making concrete plan. ▪ Lack of skilled agri-technician working on enginering aspects of micro-irrigation tools. ▪ Farmers' ability to use drip irrigation only for limited vegetables such as cabbage and cauliflower could create a barrier to the Solutions / Enablers ▪ Technical as well as business management trainings should be arranged considering real needs of the farmers and on the use of the micro-irrigation tools to multiple crops. ▪ Regular capacity buiding trainings should be organized for adoption of drip irrigation technology. ▪ Lack of skilled human resources to operate cold storage and the existing cold storage for vegetables is not operating at its full potential the agriculture technicians based on need assessment outcomes. Gender equality and social inclusion related to scaling the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Less access for women and marginal groups to get financial and technical support from government and non government organizations Solutions / Enablers ▪ Prority should be provided to women and marginal groups to provide financial and technical support on innovations Legal conditions and governance required to scale the core innovation (by-laws, policies, regulations and business models Problems / Barriers ▪ Problem in identifying ‘real farmer’ and the ‘fake farmer’ while distributing subsidies through government support programs. ▪ Documentation process is too tedious for the illeterate but needy farmers. ▪ Provision of tax in irrigation equipment that further increases the cost of irrigation tools and equipments ▪ Faremers’s heavily reliance on government subsidy program ▪ Local suppliers are not prioritized under government program hence they rarely show interest for after-sales service of irrigation tools. ▪ Suppliers have limited technician that lead to shortage for irrigation equipment repair and maintenace Solutions / Enablers ▪ Scientific subsidy distribution process to be ensured through making digital database. ▪ Volunteers hiring for supporting in the documentation process. Stakeholder coordination and scaling partnerships Problems / Barriers ▪ Effective coordination between organizations is lacking between public agencies, private sectors and NGOs/INGOs Solutions / Enablers ▪ Coordination and collaboration should be made mandatory by creating enabing environment and provision of punishment in case of coordination gap. 4.3 Key Takeaways 1. Technical Challenges: - Clogging in drip systems, inadequate tank capacities, and terrain-specific issues hinder usage. - Tools need design improvements to enhance usability and efficiency. 2. Awareness and Training: - Farmers lack technical knowledge of installation, maintenance, and effective use. - Demonstrations, exposure visits, and capacity-building programs are crucial. 3. Access and Affordability: - Drip irrigation kits are costly and limited in availability. - Financial barriers include insufficient subsidies and lack of accessible loans. 4. Market and Policy Support: - Unreliable markets for agriculture produce reduce farmer confidence in scaling. - Strengthening local supply chains, digitizing subsidies, and improving governance are critical. 5. Inclusion and Equity: - Women and marginalized groups face added barriers in accessing tools and financial support. - Tailored interventions, including women-friendly training and resources, are needed. 6. Scaling and Sustainability: - Partnerships among public, private, and NGO sectors must be strengthened. - Integrated approaches combining technical, financial, and policy reforms are essential for long-term success. 5 Challenges and Opportunities for scaling Improved fodder (Napier) for mid- hill smallholder mixed farming systems 5.1 Background In the integrated crop-livestock systems of mid-hills, availability of year-round fodder and feed is crucial. The traditional practice of collecting fodder from forests has been limited by multiple reasons including time and labor constraints and forest resource degradation. Napier has been introduced in the farming systems since quite long ago and the improved varieties have been tested and adopted at different domains. While the lowland area of Nepal is most suited for Napier due to availability of irrigation facilities, it is equally important to address the challenges associated with scaling of Napier in the mid-hills of Nepal and create enabling environment for large scale adoption with proper integration with other crops and forages. With the objective of digging out existing information in the form of perceptions of the local stakeholders, a separate session was organized during the workshop discussing the challenges and opportunities associated with the scaling of Napier. The IPSR framework that includes 10-points steps as mentioned in the section 1.4 was followed during the discussion with stakeholders. 5.2 Stakeholder discussion summary As presented in Table 4, reflecting on their knowledge of Napier cultivation as core innovation, stakeholders discussed the extent and potential of growing, managing and processing improved fodder (Napier) in mid-hill smallholder mixed farming systems to improve dairy livestock productivity for milk, reduce erosion of hill slopes and restore fallow lands. On awareness of fodder as a core innovation, stakeholders discussed in groups the challenges associated with limited knowledge of different fodder crops, differences in yield, palatability and nutritional value of fodder within and across communities, wards, municipalities and regions. They also discussed the limitations in awareness of the suitability of land for Napier, management practices, processing marketing and feeding. Farmers discussed their confidence and trust challenges and solutions to be able to have sufficient high value feed for livestock or sale by planting Napier on large parcel of land, to take care of it during the growing season including harsh winter and dry seasons, protect from damage, and improve its growth for several years. They also highlighted the problems associated with ensuring availability and access (how they acquire/share/procure inputs and materials) within their communities. They also shared challenges in accessing finance or support for sourcing/acquiring inputs and resources for managing fodder plots such as irrigation, pest control, harvesting, equipment for processing such as fodder choppers. Farmers highlighted options for integrating fodder into cereal (maize/rice/wheat) systems and capacity to establish, manage, harvest and process for feed. Explored gender challenges using 4 components of WEIA in terms of role in management, harvesting and processing fodder, (ii) decision making to improve own livestock productivity through fodder/ or plant fodder for sale, (iii) benefit sharing increased sales of fodder or improved milk production, and (iv) access to complementary technologies such as fodder choppers. On governance, challenges associated with adhering to policies and laws and mechanisms to report and resolve conflicts. Lastly, gender disaggregated groups discussed challenges of scaling out- enhancing adoption and intensified cultivation of fodder within the communities. Government officers first highlighted the problems associated with ensuring availability and access (how they support farmers to acquire / share / procure inputs and materials) within and between the municipalities (palika), wards, municipalities, districts and regions. Government Subsidy and NGO support. Finance or support is required for farmers to source/acquire inputs and resources for managing fodder plots such as irrigation, pest control, harvesting, and equipment for processing such as fodder choppers. They further evaluated how fodder is covered in livestock/agriculture/natural resource/environmental policies, policy and governance, legal instruments to enforce the law or punish if people do not follow. Lastly, the government officers discussed coordination roles and partnerships. The challenges associated with scaling up fodder through municipality, provincial and national policies and programs were discussed. They also looked at challenges associated with scaling-out through enhanced adoption by larger population and expansion to other districts/provinces. Private sector discussed challenges associated with (i) financing, pricing and logistics, (ii) market for livestock feed especially for dairy cows or buffalos, (iii) business models, and (iv) pathways for incentivizing increased adoption of fodder. Based on the problem analysis, participants identified possible solutions for ten enabler categories. Voting for problems and solutions and ranking the READINESS and USE Level were not conducted. The lesson from earlier IPSR on micro irrigation and multistakeholder platform with the community representatives and municipality staff were that the definitions of the scoring criterion required more clarification. To avoid confusion, the situational analysis will be conducted with a team of experts. Table 4: Problems and solution analysis of scaling improved fodder (Napier) Problems / Barriers Solutions / Enablers 1. Challenges related to the core innovation Problems/barriers ▪ Lack of improved varieties and no domain specific varieties. ▪ Reduction in quality fodder in due course. ▪ Problem while feeding to birthing mother livestock. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Research works should be oriented to evaluate variety suitability in different regions. ▪ Fertile lands to be allocated for the forage. ▪ Most appropriate feeding techniques should be explored. 2. Beneficiaries’ user awareness of core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Limited knowledge on transplanting and how to get productive outputs through best managmeent practices. ▪ Lack of knowledge of growth stages, intercultural management practices, Solutions / Enablers ▪ Trainings to be organized to the farmers who are not aware of the Napier production and crop husbandry ▪ Feeding composition when harvesting techniques and the apppropriate propagation methods. ▪ Majority farmers have not received information from any public entities or market actors. ▪ No sufficient information on nutritional aspects of the forage and appropriate feeding quantity. ▪ No sufficient awareness how Napier contributes to landslide management/control. mixed with other forages and feeds to be notified through trainings or other communication media. ▪ Technical training specific to the best propagation methods, time and management at seedling stage though the local extension offices. 3. Beneficiary/user confidence/trust in core innovation Confidence/Trust: Problems / Barriers ▪ Difficulty in managing rats, termites problem and brown spots on leaves. ▪ Water scarcity is a big issue that is affecting in farmers’ confidence ▪ Because Napier is relatively new forage crop, farmers know more and more confident towards other forages like oats, maize, berseem. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Effective training and information sharing required. ▪ Water availability to be ensured higher productivity and year- round production (irrigation facility) ▪ Micro-irrigation tools should be promoted for irrigating Napier especially during winter. This will help build confidence among the farmers to adopt the innvovation. ▪ Drought tolerant varieties of forage to be explored and introduced 4. Availability and Beneficiary/User's access to core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Get saplings and other support only from municipality office. ▪ New varieties not available. ▪ Forage nurseries are available locally but farmers tend not to buy themselves seeking 100% support from extension agencies. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Nursery near to farming households or near to the area to be established. ▪ Nurseries should be supported in preparing marketing strategies to reach out to the farmers. ▪ Farmers share the tillers to each other. This strategy can be promoted to increase the adoption. 5. Beneficiary/user access to finance/ affordability of the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Subsidy is not sufficient, is limited to few farmers. ▪ Loan is not sufficient in farmer groups and Solutions / Enablers ▪ There should be mechanisms to provide agricultural credit at cheaper interest rates and with cooperatives and not available when needed. ▪ No reliable services from microfinances/banks at rural areas and high and fluctuating interest rates. Farmer cannot withstand such fluctuations and increments. ▪ High demand but insufficient supply of improved seed (Red Napier) and lack of plant material production resource center that ▪ Lack of space and storage capacity of napier sapling at agrovets easy documentation process, timely and considering seasonality of agriculture sector for the payment of installments. ▪ Linking market actors, seedlings, pest management options, and feeds are to be availed at discounted price. ▪ Chaff cutters are important for livestock farmers, so better to change the strategy by reducing subsidy to 10-15% from 50% so that it will reach to additional farmers from the same allocated budget. ▪ Promote establishment of more nursery growers and resource center at local level ▪ Repair and operate the existing cold storage 6. Compatibility of core innovation with existing farming / market / policy systems or business models Problems / Barriers ▪ Associated with integration in farming system ▪ Indigenous knowledge of benefits of local fodder species in terms on increasing or decreasing milk volumn after feeding to animals. Napier’s benefit is unknown. ▪ Cattle rearing is becoming less viable due to religious value – old age cattle has now value. ▪ Competition with other crops ▪ Exposure of roots outside the soil soil due to soil erosion. ▪ Problem of price fluctuation of milk (usually farmers have to suffer) affecting fodder cultivation. ▪ Napier needs irrigation and fertilizers for bountiful harvest especially during dry period but water and fertilizers are not readily available. ▪ Are there policy deficits / conflicts? ▪ Farmers reluctance to purchase forages compared to cereals and vegetables ▪ Poor linkage of smallholder farmer raising livestock with nursery grower ▪ Higher chances of damaging napier buds while transporting from distant market Solutions / Enablers ▪ Appraoch for integration to be devised. ▪ Mixing Napier with straw and other crop residues for feeding can increase its compatibility with existing practices. ▪ Nepal government should address the issue of cattle rearing. ▪ Using fallow land for Napier planting with controlled management practices. ▪ Soil testing for checking suitability of Napier cultivation. ▪ Support for marketing of milk required from the local government in terms of price subsidy, etc. ▪ Programs needed to increase the commercial livestock production ▪ Need of agriculture ambulance for tranasportation materials 7. Beneficiary/ user capacity and knowhow to appropriately use the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Support is not oriented to ‘real farmers’ or majority farmers so capacity gaps. ▪ Support comes with no advisories or services. ▪ No idea about whom to contact. ▪ Harvest can be made only one time due to resource constraints. ▪ Repair and maintenance problems in the chaff cutter due to capacity gap and because the machine is used by a group members. ▪ Less manuring Solutions / Enablers ▪ Proper follow up and regular technical support should be ensured from the support agencies (packaging extension services). ▪ Agroadvisory services to be ensured at ward level. ▪ Rules to be formulated and implemented while using the machine in group, so that the user of the machine is accountable in maitaining the machine intact. 8. Gender equality and social inclusion related to scaling the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ No access to women-friendly technology like electric fodder chopper. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Electric fodder chopper can be operated easily by one person (manual one needs two) and 7 times more efficient. Less drudgery to women in the farm. ▪ Lighter machines are to be made available to marginal farmers in full discounts. 9. Legal conditions and governance required to scale the core innovation (by-laws, policies, regulations and business models Problems / Barriers ▪ While policies for overall fodder development exist, there are no specific provisions for expanding fodder cultivation. ▪ Land is not classified or categorized for grassland cultivation by municipalities or wards, and there are no provisions to allocate land for cultivating Napier grass. ▪ There is a lack of awareness regarding the multiple uses of land. ▪ Local governments lack information about policies related to fodder. ▪ Electric meter boxes dedicated to agriculture are difficult to get from electricity offices by the farmers. No legal provisions to provide subsidized electricity for the use of fodder choppers. ▪ The government provides subsidies from one door but charges taxes on the same from the other door. Solutions / Enablers ▪ While revising national policies may not be feasible, concerned ministries and departments can develop an action plan to promote Napier grass cultivation. ▪ Capacity-building programs should be introduced for local actors, including ward and municipality staff, on fodder plant cultivation. ▪ Awareness programs on land management should be implemented at the local level. ▪ Policy to be formulated to allow farmers to grow forages in public lands or in forests. ▪ Local government should advocate or facilitate change the restrictive legal provisions to allow more farmers to get benefits of subsidized electricity charges. ▪ Tax exemption provisions to be ensured. 10. Stakeholder coordination and scaling partnerships Problems / Barriers ▪ There is a lack of coordination between the three tiers of government regarding fodder promotion and cultivation. ▪ There is insufficient capacity, human resources, and mechanisms to coordinate between different government levels, research centers, NGOs, the private sector, and farmers. ▪ There is no provision to allocate specific areas for Napier grass cultivation. ▪ Marginalized farmers are not receiving the subsidies related to fodder and chaff cutters. ▪ Lack of coordination between farmers, nursery growers and agro vets regarding forage demand and supply ▪ Firm registration is mandatory in most government support programs but the documentation process is tedious. But in most of the cases, no distinction between registered and non-registered farms while Solutions / Enablers ▪ Establish an enabling environment for coordination among concerned stakeholders for Napier grass cultivation. A coordination platform should be created to facilitate discussions on fodder promotion, including Napier grass. ▪ Revise municipal policies to classify and allocate land specifically for Napier cultivation. ▪ Subsidy programs should be practically targeted to marginalized farmers, not just on paper. ▪ Develop a policy and monitoring mechanism to ensure that subsidies related to fodder and chaff cutters are effectively implemented. providing the government support. This implies there is mismatch between policy and practice. 5.3 Key Takeaways Napier cultivation faces challenges like lack of improved varieties, irrigation unavailability, and declining fodder quality. For higher productivity of the fodder, suitable varieties that can tolerate dry periods and low fertility should be tested in the region. Farmers' limited knowledge of best practices should be addressed through targeted training and technical support. Pests, water scarcity, and preference for other forages are to be managed by effective training, irrigation tools, and drought-tolerant varieties. Limited sapling access can be solved by establishing local nurseries and promoting farmer-to-farmer sharing. Financial barriers can be tackled with affordable credit to commercially oriented smallholder farmers and discounted inputs to the marginal and impoverished farmers. Poor farming system integration is to be addressed by intercropping, soil tests, and government support. Capacity gaps are solved through regular follow-ups and agro-advisory services. Providing lighter, efficient tools like electric fodder choppers may help reduce burden of farmers, particularly the women. Governance issues, like unclear policies and land allocation, are to be resolved through action plans, capacity-building, and public land cultivation policies. Lastly, weak coordination is to be fixed by creating a stakeholder platform and targeting subsidies effectively. 6 Challenges and Opportunities for scaling High value fruits trees for mid-hills smallholder in mixed farming systems 6.1 Background High value fruit trees are the important components of the mixed farming system which contributes to improving household nutrition and income diversity. Taking this an innovation in the mid-hills farming systems of Nepal, the workshop participants discussed the challenges and opportunities in scaling the innovation across the landscape. The discussion points were framed based on the IPSR framework developed by CGIAR that discusses appropriateness of the core innovation, awareness, confidence, access and affordability, compatibility, capacity and knowhow, inclusion, legal frameworks and governance, and coordination to scale (Table 5). There have been many issues in scaling high value fruit trees in production and marketing domains. Addressing the challenges needs systematically understating the problems and identifying possible enabling factors. 6.2 Stakeholder discussion summary Farmers face challenges with pests, diseases, and suitability of exotic fruits, which are to be addressed through localized and adaptive research. Limited awareness of fruit varieties, agronomic practices, and crop nutrition are to be resolved by disseminating adaptive research results and promoting fruit product diversification through demonstration, support municipality planning and sharing lessons in multi- stakeholder platforms. Confidence issues, such as losses due to rain, lack of insurance require proper storage facilities, fruit processing, effective insurance schemes, and fodder availability. Limited access to improved saplings and distant nurseries should be tackled by developing local nurseries and linking farmers to government and private nurseries. High-interest loans and tedious documentation processes necessitate subsidized loans through cooperatives, seed money for farmers, and fixed agriculture loan targets for banks. Poor road access, unsuitable saplings, and lack of storage and machinery call for less perishable crops, local nursery entrepreneurs, technical training, and scale- appropriate machinery. Capacity gaps in propagation techniques, harvesting, and business planning can be filled by training lead farmers and promoting market- oriented operations. Gender inequality, including increased workload for women, can be mitigated by shifting to commercial farming, promoting democratic decision-making, and introducing women-friendly machinery. Governance challenges, like insufficient subsidies and irregular interventions, require better farmer databases, accessible insurance, and strategic hiring of agricultural experts. Finally, weak stakeholder coordination can be improved through long-term collaboration mechanisms, dissemination strategies, and platforms like Krishi Chautari for multi-stakeholder engagement. Table 5: Problems and solution analysis of scaling high value fruit trees. Problems / Barriers Solutions / Enablers Challenges related to the core innovation Problems/barriers ▪ The appearance of fruit pest and disease in mango and litchi. ▪ Citrus decline problem in orange. ▪ Farmers are attracted towards new exotic fruits like avocado, kiwi, dragon fruit and mecademia nut, but their suitability/adaptability in different micro- climates is not fully known. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Support required in identification of fruit pests and diseases through localized action research/adaptive research. ▪ Adaptive research to be prioritized focusing on mid-hills. Beneficiaries’ user awareness of core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Farmers do not have proper information on right fruit species, varieties, agronomic practices fitting in their micro-climates. ▪ Problem in judicously integrating the local fruits in daily diets. ▪ Farmers know the problems associated with the fruit plantation but do not have proper knowledge on mannagment aspects like pest and diseases. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Adaptive research outcomes to be disseminated to the farmers and local stakeholders. ▪ Fruit product diversifcation options to be disseminated to the farmers through campaigns and awareness programs. Beneficiary/user confidence/trust in core innovation Confidence/Trust: Problems / Barriers ▪ Rainfall during harvesting of some fruits- difficult to transport to the market. ▪ Insurance for fruit plantation/farming is not available. ▪ Stray animals feed on newly transplanted fruit plants. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Proper storage facility to be ensured. ▪ Fruit processing techniques can help preventing the postharvest loss and helps in value addition. ▪ Proper strategy to effectively implement current insurance schemes to be in place to increase confidence of farmers. ▪ Fodder availability should be ensured so that livestock are not left for grazing in the fruit growing areas. Availability and Beneficiary/User's access to core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Improved saplings are not available at local market (associated with no nursery entrepreneurs in the locality) ▪ Farmers are relying on seedlings rather than vegetatively propagated saplings, that in Solutions / Enablers ▪ .Local fruit nursery growers should be developed giving primary priority. ▪ Innvative and leading fruit growers should be supported to turn prolongs the markatable fruit production time. ▪ Government and private fruit nurseries are at far distant and there is no regular communication and transaction. establish linkage with government and private fruit nurseries at Kathmandu or nearby districts. Beneficiary/user access to finance/ affordability of the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Though reachable for the farmers, loan from agricultural cooperatives and micro-finance has higher interest rate. ▪ Smallholder farmers are unaware of subsidized loan given in agriculture sector or deprived sectors. Only elite people or big companies have access to subsidized loan. ▪ Tedious documentation process for obtaining the agricultural loans from the banks. ▪ Banks are more interested to invest in non- agricultural sectors where return of investment is ascertained by the nature of the sector. ▪ Misuse of agricultural loans by the recipients which has negatively impacted on willingness to the financial institutions to provide such loans to the needy farmers or market actors. ▪ Though being theoretically a perfect inclusive finance tool, Kisan credit card is not available to the farmers. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Linking commercial banks to the cooperatives to provide subsidized loans to the smallholder farmers, including Kisan credit card. ▪ Number of loan targets under agriculture sector should be fixed to the bank branches by Nepal Rastra Bank (NRB). ▪ Proper monitoring tools should be designed and implemented to review the loans given in agriculture sector. ▪ Provision of seed money for the fruit growing farmers who can not go to commercial banks for loans. Compatibility of core innovation with existing farming / market / policy systems or business models Problems / Barriers ▪ Poor road accessibility in most of the rural areas of mid hills. ▪ Farmers are compelled to purchase fruit saplings from outsiders, which may not fit to the local agro-climate zones (e.g. Orange saplings purchased from terai districts). ▪ Lack of cold storage facilities and technical knowledge gap in the available cold chambers. ▪ No sufficient production per household and no operationalized collection center. ▪ Lack of scale-appropriate machineries suitable for hill terrain to prepare pits for fruit plantation, training and pruning, spraying, and for harvesting and transport. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Less perishable fruits and nuts that have longer postharvest life should be promoted. ▪ Nursery entrepreneurs should be developed locally to produce fruit saplings locally. ▪ Technical training related to post-harvest storage should be provisioned. ▪ One village one product concept can be utilized to increase volumn of the fruit produce that also helps to operationalize the collection centers. ▪ Local machinery suppliers should be supported in introducing scale-appropriate machines and effective business models to be developed to increase adoption of such machines. Beneficiary/ user capacity and knowhow to appropriately use the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ Limited knowledge on appropriate vegetative propagation (e.g. grafting, air layering) to the farmers. ▪ Inadequate information on best harvesting technique for fruits to increase postharvest life. ▪ Improper knowledge on business plan development focusing on fruit farming as an agri-business. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Proper training to the lead farmers who have already started growing fruits at commercial scale so that they can become nursery entrepreneurs. ▪ Training on market-oriented farm operations should be arranged. Gender equality and social inclusion related to scaling the core innovation Problems / Barriers ▪ In the existing condition, if fruit farming scaled at farm level, this will add burden to the female members as they are to be engaged in multiple farm and household operations. ▪ Patriarchal society preventing women to make decision. ▪ Drudgery may increase for women farmers especially during harvesting and transportation. Solutions / Enablers ▪ The household can switch to commercial medium to large scale fruit farming (leaving other sub-sectors) so that female members can also devote full time in fruit farming. ▪ Enabling environment for democratic family discussions are required. ▪ Appropriate women-friendly machines should be introduced for picking, collection and transportation of fruits. Legal conditions and governance required to scale the core innovation (by-laws, policies, regulations and business models Problems / Barriers ▪ Subsidies are available but not provided judiciously and not enough for large number of smallholder farmers. ▪ Different perspectives of stakeholders on insurance provisioning process- farmers percieved it as a lengthy process but extension officers think it is much easier. ▪ Quick transfer of government staff including of agriculture extension offices led to irregularity of the interventions/activities prioritized in fruit production and marketing. ▪ Inadequate human resources at local level. ▪ Budget constraints for providing subsidy to Solutions / Enablers ▪ Proper database of subsidy receiving farmers in easily accessible formats (e.g. digital) to be kept by the extension offices so that farmers can be selected for the government support schemes without duplication. ▪ The available insurance schemes should be made easily accessible by increasing the number of insurance agents at local level. Special trainings are many famers. So, the government officials are less enthusiastic to share the information about the support activities with the wider communinity in anticipation of avoiding unnecessary burden or stress. required to develop insurance agents. ▪ Long-term strategic hiring of experts/technicians should be made by the municipalities. ▪ Proper trainings to the available technicians. Stakeholder coordination and scaling partnerships Problems / Barriers ▪ Lack of proper linkage between government fruit research and development centers and local extension offices. This created barrier in dissemination and adoption of new technologies.(varieties/propagation techniques and post-harvest management) ▪ No adequate dissemination strategy by the fruit centers. Solutions / Enablers ▪ Local government should reach out to the centers and seek possibility of establishing long- term collaboration mechanisms. ▪ The government centers should prepare strategies to disseminate information to the wider stakeholders. ▪ Krishi Chautari (multistakeholder) platform can be used to devise solutions to rectify the problem encountered during collection of fruits. Key Takeaways Fruits in mid-hill regions have high potential but are constrained by several challenges like lack of appropriate technologies, biophysical constraints such as pests, diseases, and suitability of exotic fruits. This indicates there are issues related to core innovation itself. Demonstration through localized adaptive research helps in identifying possible solutions of the local problems that farmers have been facing. Farmers also gain knowledge to increase awareness of fruit varieties, agronomic practices, and diet diversification through such efforts. By integrating small-scale commercial fruit components into a particular hill-based farm, a finance scheme beneficial for the smallholders will encourage farmers to intensify fruit planting thereby contributing to increase voluminous production. This will further attract market actors to invest in the fruit value chain in post-harvest processing and marketing. Fruit trees that are well adaptive to different micro-climates ranging from tropical to warm temperate based on elevation difference can be promoted through landscape level planning between the municipalities which may need facilitation from provincial and federal entities working in agricultural commercialization and modernization. 7 Conclusion and next steps After 3 years of designing and successfully testing micro irrigation, fodder, fruit, MSAKH innovation in Gurbhakot municipality in Surkhet and Halesi-Tuwachung in Khotang, the stakeholders have ambition to scale the innovations. Directly the program benefited 125 farmers and through the support of the municipality, has potential to reach thousands of indirect beneficiary households in both municipalities. Scaling out and scaling up ambition in the next 3-5 years is to support municipalities in planning, develop business models, and provide a case to support evidence-based policy and strategy formulation at municipality and provincial level. The scaling strategy workshop primarily targeted local stakeholders, gathering their concerns and recommendations. This approach provided valuable insights into the perspectives of the direct beneficiaries in a participatory manner, which is crucial for the successful scaling of the innovation. However, due to the limited participation of provincial and federal stakeholders, additional consultations with these key stakeholders are necessary. Furthermore, due to the busy schedules of municipality representatives, they were only able to attend the opening session. Given the limited involvement of provincial, federal, and municipality representatives during the workshop, a follow-up validation session or one-on-one meetings with key personnel directly involved in innovations is recommended. This will help ensure alignment and endorsement of the proposed scaling solutions by all stakeholders. 8 REFERENCES Adhikari, T., K.C., J., Shrestha, N., Neupane, R.R., Neupane, N., Khadka, M., Koirala, S. 2024. Micro-irrigation Technology in Mixed Farming System of Nepal. Leaflet for farmers. Nepal: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). Deolu-Ajayi, A. O., Aranguiz, A. A., Alho, C. F., Siegmund-Schultze, M., Ndambi, A., Selassie, Y. G., Abebe, Y., Groot, J. C. J., Heesmans, H., Hengsdijk, H., & van der Lee, J. (2023). Integrated Analysis of opportunities and trade-offs for mixed crop- livestock farm types in Amhara, Ethiopia. Agricultural Systems, 208, 103665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103665 Herrero, M., Thornton, P.K., Notenbaert, A.M. et al. (2010) Smart investments in sustainable food production: Revisiting mixed crop-livestock systems. Science 327(5967): 822–825. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1183725 Holling, C.S. (1995) Sustainability: The cross-scale dimension, in Munasinghe, M., Shearer, W. (eds) Defining and Measuring Sustainability: The Biogeophysical Foundations. Washington, DC: World Bank. K.C., J., Kafle, S., Cheesman, S., Koirala, S., Neupane, N., Shrestha, N., Gathala, M.K. and Khadka, M. 2023. Interventions to sustainably improve the mixed farming systems of the Nepali Mid-hills. CGIAR research initiative on Mixed Farming Systems. Mexico, CIMMYT and Colombo, Sri Lanka: IWMI. Koirala, S. and Neupane, N. 2023. Breaking barriers in agriculture: implementing and scaling innovations in mixed farming systems is possible only with inclusive policies. The Kathmandu Post: https://kathmandupost.com/columns/2023/09/23/breaking- the-barriers-in-agriculture Neupane, N. and Koirala, S. 2023. Reviving Nepal’s agriculture: Mixed farming can boost Nepal’s income, food security and resilience to climate change. The Kathmandu Post: https://kathmandupost.com/columns/2023/05/31/reviving- nepal-s-agriculture Schubert, C. (2015). Why mixed crop and livestock farming systems are central for future agriculture development. CCAFS. https://ccafs.cgiar.org/news/why-mixed- crop-and-livestock-farming-systems-are-central-future-agriculture- development https://kathmandupost.com/columns/2023/09/23/breaking-the-barriers-in-agriculture https://kathmandupost.com/columns/2023/09/23/breaking-the-barriers-in-agriculture 9 Annexes 9.1 Annex 1: List of participants of workshop at Gurbhakot Municipality, Surkhet SN Participant Name Gender Organization/Address Designation 1 Birma Sunar F Gurbhakot-12 MFS Lead Farmer 2 Chandra Bahadur Gharti M Ward Office, Gurbhakot-14 Chairperson 3 Deepa Woli F CIMMYT Communication Specialist 4 Devraj Sunar M Ward-11 Lead Farmer 5 Dhan Bahadur Kathayat M MoLMAC, Karnali Province Spokesperson 6 Dil Bahadur Oli M Gurbhakot-6 Lead Farmer 7 Dil Kumari Thapa F Gurbhakot-2 Lead Farmer 8 Dipak Sharma M Gurbhakot Municipality CR 9 Dr. Chet Man GC M DoAR, Dasrathpur, Surkhet Technical Officer 10 Ganga Aryal F Sanakishan Sahakari, Gumi Member 11 Govinda Siwakoti M Onion Films Videographer 12 Hasta Pun M Gurbhakot Municipality Mayor 13 Hira Kumari Gharti F Gurbhakot Municipality Agriculture Technician 14 Jibesh K.C M IWMI Research Officer 15 Jit Bahadur Oli M Gurbhakot-4 Lead Farmer 16 Jyoti Dhakal F Division Watershed Management Office Watershed Conservation Assistant 17 Kaliban Oli M Gurbhakot-8 Lead Farmer 18 Kamala Rawat F Gurbhakot-14 MFS Lead Farmer 19 Karna Bahadur Gharti M MFS Lead Farmer, Gurbhakot-12 MFS Lead Farmer 20 Lil Bahadur Thapa M Local Nursery Proprietor 21 Lok Bahadur Oli M Kantipur Krishi Nursery Tatha Falful Samuha Chairperson 22 Lokendra Chalise M CIMMYT Field Consultant 23 Lokendra Khadka M CIMMYT Research Associate 24 Man Bahadur Khatri M Gurbhakot Municipality Agriculture Technician 25 Manoj Pun M Gurbhakot Municipality Veterinary Technician 26 Nabraj Thapa M Gurbhakot Municipality Agriculture Officer 27 Naini Oli F Ward No-9 Agriculture Technician 28 Pradeep Sunar M Sundar Nepal Nutrition Project Field Officer 29 Prakash Neupane M LI-BIRD Program Officer 30 Powell Mponela M CIMMYT Scientist 31 Purna Bahadur Roka M Gurbhakot Municipality Dragon Fruit Farmer 32 Rejina Acharya F Ministry Of Industry, Tourism, Forest and Environment Office Senior Watershed Management officer 33 Rashila KC F Onion Films Videographer 34 Samar Bahadur Regmi M Laxmi Agriculture Suppliers Proprietor 35 Sagar Kafle M CIMMYT Research Associate 36 Sangita Shrestha F Department Of Agriculture, Kathmandu Senior Agriculture Engineer 37 Sanju Koirala F IWMI Social Science Researcher 38 Santosh KC M Local Nursery Proprietor 39 Sita Bhandari F Gurbhakot-2 Lead Farmer 40 Tara Rokaya F Gurbhakot-14 MFS Lead Farmer 41 Tulasa Thapa Poudel F Cold Storage and Kalimati Cooperative Sub-Manager 42 Tulsi Prasad Sharma M Ward No-12 Chairperson 9.2 Annex 2: List of participants of workshop at Halesi Tuwachung Municipality, Khotang SN Name Gender Organization/Address Designation 1 Bhupal Singh Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 3 Ward Chairperson 2 Bimala Darji F Halesi Tuwachung Municipality - 5 Ward Member 3 Bimala Rai F Halesi Tuwachung Municipality Mayor 4 Debendra Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 2 Ward Chairperson 5 Dhanalaxmi Kami F Halesi Tuwachung - 6 Ward Member 6 Dharmaraj Rai M Machinery Dealer, Diktel Supplier 7 Dilshara Rai F Halesi Tuwachung - 7 Veg/Producer/Seller 8 Dipendra Rai M Halesi Tuwachung Municipality Engineer/Technician 9 Durga Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 7 Lead Farmer, Veg, Fruit Producer/Seller 10 Ganga Bahadur Khadka M Halesi Tuwachung - 8 Farmer 11 Ghanashyam Gelal M Agriculture Knowledge Center, Khotang Assistant Soil Scientist 12 Govinda Siwakoti M IWMI/Onion Films Consultant/Videographer 13 Jogdhan Rai M Ward 2 Farmer 14 Kabindra Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 5 Veg /Livestock Producer 15 Kabita Rai F Halesi Tuwachung Municipality Secretory of Mayor 16 Krishna Yadav M PMAMP, Khotang Agriculture Officer 17 Kubesh Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 7 Agrovet 18 Kumarsher Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 7 Veg/Fruit Producer/Seller 19 Lokendra Khadka M CIMMYT Research Associate 20 Mankal Rai F Halesi Tuwachung - 1 Farmer 21 Mayash Katuwal M Halesi Tuwachung Municipality Vet/Technician 22 Mekh Bahadur Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 6 Farmer 23 Pabindra Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 3 Ward Member 24 Padam Prasad Adhikari M WTHC, Kirtipur Senior Horticulture Officer 25 Pradeep Joshi M Halesi Tuwachung - 7 Operation Manager, Zambala Resort 26 Rabin Bhattarai M Halesi Tuwachung - 5 Agriculture Officer 27 Rabin Raut M Halesi Tuwachung Municipality JTA 28 Rashila K.C F IWMI/Onion Films Consultant/Videographer 29 Rudrakumar Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 1 Ward Chairperson 30 Rupchandra Khatri M Halesi Tuwachung - 5 Veterinary JTA 31 Rupindra Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 5 Ward chairperson 32 Sagar Kafle M CIMMYT Researcher 33 Samjhana Rai F IWMI/CIMMYT Social Mobilizer 34 Sanju Koirala F IWMI Researcher 35 Sitakumari Thapa Magar F Halesi Tuwachung - 6 Farmer 36 Surendra Phuyal M IWMI Consultant 37 Tekraj Rai M Halesi Tuwachung - 8 Ward chairperson 38 Tirtha Bahadur Karki M Halesi Tuwachung - 6 Farmer/Animal Husbandry 39 Haroon Sseguya M IITA Scientist