change_area_presentation_groupwork

=CCAFS-ILRI Workshop on Communications and Social Learning in Climate Change = 8-10 May 2012 ILRI Campus, Addis Ababa

=Final group work presentation (private plenary session)=

Based on the initial group work results identifying major change areas, five key change areas emerged across the groups in a plenary consolidation exercise to cluster up the changes. These five areas were: social differentiation, documenting and testing social learning, different time scales, endogenous social learning and social learning in CCAFS/CGIAR. Participants split across the five groups to determine what activities would be required, at what scale and targeting who, where they would take place, who would play a role, what time would be needed for these activities, what funding ballpark would be required and what would be done to address social differentiation. A group peer-review exercise (each group being reviewed by another one) was also organized. It is included here.
 * Presentation by **** Social Differentiation group (reviewed by endogenous social learning group) [[file:Social Differentiation (long).ppt]] **
 * Presentation of transformative changes to enhance food security
 * The problem is the decision-making at local level
 * Activities:
 * Crowdsourcing;
 * Bucket of tools and approaches on social learning and social differentiation - including action research;
 * This will be an interative process;
 * From 2013-2020, going from research to action - will go in parallel with activity 1
 * Developing a social learning process, to relate to CCAFS science meeting;
 * 2012-2020: management with coordinators to manage this process and organize working groups to deliver on activities 1-2
 * Activity 1&2: USD 50.000 / Activity 2: USD 300.000.
 * Lots of people have never met so we want to bring them together (social learning and social differentiation groups of people)
 * Feedback from the group**:
 * Break this down a bit, I hear much about CCAFS but not about others;
 * Q: What scale?
 * A: Sub-national level, where CCAFS is already working - building around what CCAFS is already doing;
 * There is a lot of overlap between this group and the endogenous group;
 * Q: Are you including livelihoods in this group?
 * A: Yes, food security is integrated with livelihoods;
 * Q: I haven't heard communities being brought into this - communities would be important for social differentiation
 * A: We are including communities when mentioning decision making at local level.
 * Counter-A: Make this explicit then!
 * Q: The whole aspect is focusing on communities and other entities but it needs to ensure that communities are included enough, have strong enough a voice.
 * A: Much work is done for communities, not with them. This work plan is around communities + around communities
 * You seem to consider that communities are homogeneous and they're not e.g. farmers, fishermen etc. you need to make this more explicit!
 * Q. There are so many ways to tackle social differentiation
 * A: Yes but the CCAFS group will have to determine where the priorities are, based on the original activities (activity 1). It will help sharpen in the next 18 months.
 * Q. From earlier work from CCAFS, trying to develop baseline information there is some information to indicate where social stratification is at e.g. in Borana, Southern Ethiopia in a pastoral system.
 * A: Working groups will have to choose which countries and sites to focus on.
 * Q. You have USD 250.000 so you can have an idea about the amount of sites you're covering.
 * A: In the first 18 months there will be much interaction about social learning but then we'll need to know what partners to work with and which people to bring on board.
 * Q: Who will lead this work?
 * A: CCAFS will take the lead among CG centers and highlight what other champion CG centers could take this forward;
 * Q: For activity 1, is it also CCAFS?
 * A: the idea is to bring along many partners that work on this e.g. CARE... Activity 1 is social learning about social learning.
 * Presentation by ** **Documentation and Testing** **group** ** (reviewed by social differentiation group) [[file:Documentation & testing of social learning (long).ppt]] **

Why documentation:
 * Test SL experiences taking place and provide evidence for outsiders
 * Mechanisms to improve the SL practices

5 major activities
 * 1) Look at what is happening and select cases (criteria and lessons);
 * 2) Select the participants for this process – (could be observers from outside or insiders that are part of the process as well). Outside researchers and champions and keep in mind the social differentiation and representational aspects (who is sent to represent a particular group);
 * 3) Describe the context, process, activities and time where SL is being researched for climate change. This needs information collection and field visits;
 * 4) Analysis (testing), attitudes, knowledge and skills and practices – what are the cases (and factors) to develop this attitude – how to do this? What are the different analytical frameworks we can look at? How to select indicators on the basis of data that is predefined according to our goal and unique selling point that we want to sell?
 * 5) Writing, sharing and dissemination – texts, videos, photos, cross visits, journal of social learning, conferences, Farming Matters (magazine), Share Fair and workshops and radios (media has to be neutral and can be used to reach a wider group).


 * Time frame: 2 to 3 years learning; 4 to 10 years for change
 * Roles – need facilitators, researchers and media people
 * Role of CCAFS: Select cases, joining the process funding and logistics networking and dissemination
 * Budget: USD 200,000 per case


 * Feedback from the peer review group**:
 * What kind of case might be looked at?
 * How will that be different from network evaluators?
 * Presentation by ** **Time Scale** ** group (reviewed by Documentation and Testing group) [[file:Time scales (long).ppt]] **
 * Climate change is a long term problem that needs adaptation by stakeholders
 * The response to climate change requires action by stakeholders now, but how do we evaluate this with different horizons, with short and longer term actions?
 * There is a problem of understanding policy and resource problems.
 * Activities:**
 * Time horizons evaluation tool
 * Incentives framework
 * Evaluating change
 * Anticipated outcomes:**
 * Projects are better linked to stakeholder needs as well as short/medium term development objectives


 * Feedback from the peer review group**:
 * The scenario should look at short term priorities and needs and link those with longer time adaptive capacity;
 * Q. You should rephrase the incentive framework, it needs to be clear, incentives should be proactive, people should be motivated enough, have you dealt this issues in your discussions?
 * A: We have discussed about different stakeholders and different time horizons, the short term needs and the long term need in the time frame, linking the needs and the incentives for bigger picture and link those to longer time adaptive capacity;
 * Aspiration and goals should be looked at for incentives criteria;
 * You need to expand a bit on the incentive framework.
 * Presentation by ** **Social Learning in CCAFS / CG** ** group (reviewed by time scale group) [[file:Social learning within CCAFS.ppt]] **
 * Devise CCAFS vision in 2020 within the CGIAR with respect to methodology;
 * Organize open CCAFS systems to other partners' systems;
 * Identify and organize groups that catalyze social learning and create community of practice;
 * Create advisory group both internally and externally;
 * Design social learning with the aim to provide support for workshops, paper writing etc.;
 * Raise awareness by using different platforms;
 * Think of a “bucket” full of a conceptualized collection of competitive research activities.


 * Feedback from the group**:
 * Q: How do you use the bucket full of “silver bullets”?
 * A: Distribute them to different platforms as good ideas and monitor and evaluate along the way
 * Q: Does CCAFS have expertise in social learning?
 * A: This should looked at.
 * Q: The scope of the project seems focused on CGIAR. How about other partners?
 * A: Use different platforms to link with other partners.
 * Use a mix of expertise to accomplish the task envisioned.

**Presentation by** Endogenous Social Learning **group (reviewed by CCAFS/CG social learning group group) [[file:Endogenous Social Learning [long].ppt]]**
Discussion on a presentation about 3 pilot projects/initiatives set up which will provide documentation etc
 * Need to identify key areas between CCAFS and the 3 cases;
 * Supporting documentation through 3 pilot projects, analysis of individual projects to identify key social learning indicators, what is scalable, what impacts do these projects have;
 * Go back to the analysis after the 2 years to measure impact;
 * Goal of using analysis : linking partners;


 * Feedback from the group**:
 * CCAFS and partners look for opportunities internally and externally. Where are the opportunities, should not only coming from CCAFS;
 * Working on 3 projects over 2 yrs period would help engage partners and conclude + analysis + maintaining relationship w partners and reevaluating needs, if needs changed going back to the process again;
 * Budget for 3 pilot project 300 000$;
 * Social differentiation would be included all the way in the process.
 * Q : What exactly is endogenous social learning ?
 * A : ex : nomadic pastoralists, where do they find knowledge, water holes for women, informal information going around, about markets etc, this knowledge diffuses fast
 * Q :How is this taking place ? What are the factors that allow it to take place ?
 * A: Spaces used are already there, not imposed (this is part of the selection criteria)
 * Q : Monitoring ? How is it included ?
 * A : in a dialogue with partners, the stakeholders in this case. Previously it was an evaluative framework, now partners should determine what indicators should be used.
 * Q : what communities are you going for ?
 * A : Knowledge centers, generated through local intiatives, not really communities per se. Selection criteria would cross different scales.
 * Q : How would we go about mapping ?
 * Q : Identify the case studies is a big undertaking, how can it be done ?
 * Q : Evaluation, who is benefitting ?
 * A : The ‘scan’ we propose hopes to identify those spaces. Comment : Innovations need to come through more.
 * Q : Mainstream through the CG ? or differently ?
 * A : partners were not emphasized enough
 * Q : Who is CCAFS really ? should we change it to ‘CCAFS network’ ?
 * The ultimate ambition is dual learning. CCAFS is not the only actor of change, it has to provide a live example of social learning;
 * In terms of community of practice, //bucket// means nothing, //basket// is better, it maintains the idea of miscellaneous;
 * Q. How is the basket going to be dynamic ?
 * We focus on the basket first, CRP next;
 * The community of practice becomes an enabling environment. Communication has to be part of the framework design . « a growing dynamic basket », constantly filling. « the wizard of CCAFS »