reflection4_agenda

=**NBDC / Land and Water Management National Platform Meeting 4: focus on NBDC**= toc Large auditorium, ILRI Ethiopia, Addis Ababa. 20-21 February 2013 Back to the event home page

=** Agenda **=


 * Day 1 **
 * 8.30 Registration of participants
 * 9.00 Introduction of the workshop:
 * Participants
 * Workshop agenda and objectives - [[file:reflection4_1. SL intro nbdc feb 2013.ppt|presentation]]
 * NBDC timeline and current reflections
 * NBDC – National Platform Meeting
 * Gender in NBDC and beyond - [[file:reflection4_2. NBDC Forward Looking Gender Assessment.pptx|presentation]]
 * // 10.30 ShareFair Break (exhibit of NBDC and other materials) //
 * 11.00 Presentation of key NBDC messages and ( group work ) feedback and expectations - [[file:PROPOSED KEY NBDC MESSAGES-share20Feb.docx|List of key messages]] and [[file:reflection4_3. Key messages presentation.pptx|presentation ]]about it.
 * // 12.30 Lunch break //
 * 13.30 Introducing current and upcoming NBDC approaches and methods ( group discussions )
 * // 15.00 ShareFair Break //
 * 15.30 Detailed group work  on key messages and priority activities for the last NBDC year
 * 17.00 Brief feedback from group work
 * 17.15 Closing remarks for the day
 * // 18.00 Cocktail //


 * Day 2 **
 * 8.30 //ShareFair introduction// - Feedback about day 1 and gap analysis
 * 9.00 Group work continued (from previous day) - who to influence and how? Opportunities and constraints?
 * // 10.30 Break //
 * 11.00 Presentation of group results and synthesis - Targeting recommendations and priority areas of work
 * Group 1 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 1 Community leadership.docx|Results]]
 * Group 2 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 2 Local and scientific knowledge.docx|Results]]
 * Group 3 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 3 Facilitating learning processes.docx|Results]]
 * Group 4 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 4 Incentives.docx|Results]]
 * Group 5 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 5 Capacity Strengthening.docx|Results]]
 * Group 6 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 6 Learning and planning tools.xlsx|Results]]
 * // 12.30 Lunch break //
 * 13.30 High power policy session: how to integrate NBDC results and messages in current policies?
 * 14.15 Marketplace: group work  on specific pending issues e.g. gender, existing tools and approaches etc.
 * // 15.00 Break //
 * 15.30 Synthesis reflections about NBDC priorities and implications (National Platform, thematic working groups' learning events, p olicy and practice implications and recommendations
 * 16.15 Closing remarks and next steps.

=Notes of the meeting=

Introduction by Ato Seleshi, State Minister for Natural Resources
Invited guests,

Workshop Participants,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

On behalf of the Ministry of Agriculture and that of myself, I am honored to address and welcome you all to this the fourth stakeholder’s national platform meeting organized by the national steering committee in collaboration with The Nile Basin Development Challenge Program.

Studies show that, for more than decades, many challenges facing land management and rural development in Ethiopia. These include: inappropriate use of our precious land; fragile soils, undulating terrain, erosive rains and environmentally destructive farming methods. These, coupled with other constraints land users used to face are the causes of low productivity, food insecurity and poverty in the country as a whole. Cognizant of the problems caused by land degradation, efforts for controlling land degradation started in northern Ethiopia in the early 1970s. Systematic and planned implementation of land management activities through the watershed approach was launched with the creation of the Department, in the Ministry of Agriculture in the early 1980s. About 117 watersheds with areas ranging from 20,000 – 40,000 ha each in size were selected and implemented through an incentive-based soil and water conservation interventions, inter-alia as Food For Work. Despite an enormous effort and investments through watershed and extension approaches in a top-down planning, uncoordinated efforts coupled with lack of clear rural development policies, lack of adequate technical and financial inputs, doubts about tenure security and the low awareness and lack of participation from the general public, the results were not satisfactory. The measures couldn’t sufficiently address land degradation problems and to fulfill the increasing needs of food production. However, the efforts made and the technologies tested here and there in the past helped a lot to learn from.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Learning from the experiences of success and failures, the Government of Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia has developed appropriate and clear policies and strategies that center around addressing problems of food security and associated causes in rural areas including problems of land management. The government has wisely considered the land management agenda as one of its priorities by focusing on scaling up of proven best practices through community based approach. The practices so selected are recognized as a means to counter land degradation, prevent declining of land productivity, avoid biodiversity losses and thereby deal with obstacles to economic growth, sustainable development and the impact of climatic changes. Until very recent years even after the fall of the Dergue government, the land management interventions and practices tend to be limited to food in secured and moisture deficit areas of highlands. Currently, because of the deep-rooted awareness of the leadership at all levels and the community at large on the importance of land management activities, the participation of the community has extremely increased. The participation of all land users in the planning and implementation of land management activities in the country can be recognized from what is going on in the regions at this time in collective, in groups, or individually through mobilizing free work force and material needed for implementation. Each year, more than millions of hectares of degrade lands and watersheds are rehabilitated and put under area closures. It is also wise to recognize the contributions of our development partners who have been relentlessly supporting the efforts in implementing land management practices.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In 2006, the Government of Ethiopia in cooperation with development partners has established a mechanism to coordinate all sustainable land management efforts in the country. This mechanism helped to have a platform of coordinating, harmonizing, aligning and integrating the different efforts of stakeholders in NRM and land management. This again led to the development of Ethiopian Strategic Investment Framework for Sustainable land Management (ESIF-SLM), which outlines key priorities for SLM investments and a strategy for scaling up best practices. Since then, remarkable results have been achieved in the sub-sector. I have mentioned this in my earlier speech.

Successful up-scaling and mainstreaming of sustainable land management requires that we learn from our past and go beyond to our next best thinking including what has worked and releasing what no longer serves. The activities on the ground need to be supported by research. Scientific analysis and hydrological modeling of watersheds must support the achievements, benefits in terms of economy, ecosystem regeneration, productivity enhancement and the like.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Today’s gathering of decision makers, professionals, practitioners and researches in the field of Sustainable Land Management. That is why we are here today to learn and discuss how a relatively small but significant research for development program, The Nile Basin Development Challenge (NBDC) may assist in further strengthening and stimulate thinking on the implementation of the SLM program in the coming years. The NBDC is sponsored through the Challenge Program on Water and Food. The Nile River Basin is one of six globally selected river basins in which research has been set a task to help develop a strategy in response to a specific challenge. In the case of the Nile, the Challenge has been how to support and develop rainwater management strategies. The NBDC program is led through a consortium of research and development organizations drawn from both national and international organizations and is led by the International Water Management Institute and the International Livestock Research Institute.

In the meeting today and tomorrow the discussion will focus on program implementation progress that has been made since the inception of the current phase of the work. Over the last 3 years there have been some significant achievements made by the NBDC. I know through my discussions with Dr. Simon of IWMI that many of these achievements take the form of building trust and engagement with different stakeholders. Just to highlight a few points, that I am sure will be developed and talked about over the rest of the meeting are establishing long term, meaningful partnerships with a number of agencies and communities for its institutional sustainability, Capacity building through training of communities in the monitoring of natural resources, establishing of innovation platforms in to improving the DA and extension agents in NR management in a sustainable manner, characterization and collection of primary data to help support policy development and implementation of the work evidence based to demonstrate and show where changes might lead to benefits for a range of farm communities and their advisory and planning processes and we look forward of considering potential developments through the use of scenarios and modeling. These results when available will assist decision makers review where and what the consequences of different actions might be at a landscape level.

Dear workshop participants

From the above different lines of issues and points, I hope the NBDC have come up with some draft messages coming out of the project and the primary task of today and tomorrow is to consider these messages. The feedback from experts in the room on whether the messages seem to be credible, relevant and supported by evidence is quite vital. I urge all of you do so actively.

Let me wind up my remark by wishing you fruitful deliberations and discussions and I look forward to hearing how the meeting and its outcomes develop at the end and later in the future.

I thank you for your attention,

Introduction of the workshop objectives etc. by Simon Langan, Nile Basin co-leader
The social process of innovation is evolutionary. See the by Simon Langan.

Gender in NBDC and beyond - by Cathy Farnsworth
See the by Cathy Farnsworth.

Introduction of participants
//The facilitator asked each table to find out who was around and for participants to find 3 keywords that characterized them.//
 * Gender research and commitment
 * Science technology and innovation
 * Political, partner, research and technology
 * Diplomat, experienced and humorous
 * Management passionate and simulate
 * Visionary and experienced
 * Patient considerate and insightful
 * Tunisians, net-worker and experienced
 * Land, water and sustainability
 * NRM watershed, research and development
 * Development, Climate and policy
 * Positive and climate adaptation
 * Hydrology, GIS
 * Sociable, innovation and environment
 * Agro-forestry Anthropology
 * Agro-forestry, Resilience and ICRAF
 * Food security, participatory research, NRM
 * Agricultural economist, Tall,
 * Hydrologist and student
 * Food security, sustainable land management and economic development
 * Modelling, Innovation, Ecology

Feedback on messages
See the by Doug Merrey. //The participants were asked to discuss around 6 tables (3 sets of 2 tables discussing three main questions) the content and implications of the messages.//

Question 1: How does the 'new paradigm' and the support messages resonate with you? What is your general feeling about them(do you like them or not)?

 * Group by An:**
 * 1) The presentation is okay but needs improvement needs to be elaborated, clarity and needs to be explained
 * 2) Good principles, but should be realistic or should be specific to local conditions
 * 2, 3 and 6 are almost inter-related
 * 1) How workable it is when we say community leadership on demand? Given the top-down governance approach of the government
 * 2) The incentives part is not clear. What is the incentive? What incentive mechanisms are there? And related things need to be clear (how to prioritize and target? …..
 * 3) What is the value added by NBDC in relation to agricultural extension/SLM? Identifying what NBDC has added to previous research will help prioritize how to go forward
 * 4) Concern how such issues will be implemented at different levels
 * 5) How is the landscape concept different from government’s watershed approach


 * Group by Gerba**
 * 1) NBDC are consistent with government extension strategy
 * 2) To what extent the NBDC used the government INSM manual
 * 3) Lack of balanced intervention in the basin (upstream =mid – down stream
 * 4) Detailed findings was not reported
 * 5) Partnership is loose – they are not in the driving chair (symbolic networking)
 * 6) Local community leadership – what are the tools to bring equality to gender
 * 7) People’s demand should be real demand – and demand comes after intervention
 * 8) Importance of balancing capacity building with input supply raised.
 * 9) Lack of documentation of long years SLM effort on the upper landscape
 * 10) Concrete evidence is important to bring paradigm shift (evidence based)
 * 11) Smart incentive arrangement should be clear and should be mentioned in the beginning of the project
 * 12) It is also relatively new
 * 13) Community engagement from the beginning like in IP is the paradigm shift
 * 14) NBDC has brought tools how to do this (IP, HS, WAT-A game) are among others
 * 15) How possible to focus on local need in terms of capacity building (people learning should be focused on)

Question 2: What (other) messages or key issues might be missing and why do we really need to prioritize them?

 * Group by Kindu**
 * 1) Best RWM practices identified and prioritized for advocacy
 * 2) Find/create synergy of the Nile basin activities taking place across the nation – duplication of efforts
 * 3) Make critical assessment of market based agricultural economy (market Vx food security)
 * 4) Impact of the project should be visible – activities on the ground (emphasize the project impact)
 * 5) Institutionalize NBDC’s strategies (continuity, sustainability/ SLM technical + steering committees)
 * 6) Connect climate proof NBDC recommendations/interventions
 * 7) Access to credit to enhance technology adoption


 * Group by Zelalem**
 * 1) Capacity building: beyond training and integrate also institutional capacity and also system designing
 * 2) Learning: Knowledge management

New Message
 * 1) Monitoring and evaluation
 * 2) Knowledge management (documentation, dissemination etc)
 * 3) Community empowerment
 * 4) Awareness creation
 * 5) Creating condition for getting them space
 * 6) Knowledge management is already included but needs ownership/institutionalization of the platforms and sustainability
 * CB: beyond the software – hardware (technologies for communities)
 * 1) Document new experiences
 * 2) New way of coordinating activities beyond IP should be done
 * 3) Areas for future research should be identified and documented
 * 4) Key message ….should be first identified before this
 * 5) Nile basin should be lined. Institutions working together coordinate and integrate

====Question 3: What do you expect NBDC to work on in the last year (to sharpen this work and make it more relevant for integrated rainwater management), to improve the lives of farmers through integrated rainwater management====


 * Group by Alan**:
 * There's a number of good things done. These now need to be integrated. The National platform could be a good forum, mixing government and NGOs.
 * We should also learn from failure
 * NBDC: Follow on projects - documentation of what has happened to feed into future work
 * Good documentation / promotion to avoid reinventing the wheel in future projects
 * Ensuring sustainability and continuation of activities
 * Hydromet (Universities), IPs (local NGOs), land/water conservation project
 * So far a lot of emphasis on disparate tools
 * Need to simplify them/ make them more user-friendly. Putting them into integrated package.
 * Scaling but already overloaded. Need to be realistic about what we can achieve. Need additional funds to build more critical mass (RED-FS).
 * Continuation of successes depends on strong benefits for farmers e.g. through diversification of enterprises
 * Thinking about quality / follow-up on SWC structures/techniques
 * Also incentives - need to be thought through. But also need to ensure that technologies are the right ones...
 * Baskets of options
 * Thinking about inputs/markets etc.
 * Landscape scale issues. Linking water harvesting initiatives with agronomy
 * Institutional issues associated with individual vs. collective action.
 * Supporting mechanisms for tools
 * Provide technical support to finalize existing initiatives e.g. new extension strategy. Amhara proclamation.


 * Group by Amanda**:
 * Opportunity: coordinate with existing IS initiatives
 * Sharpening focus with IPs
 * Sharpen one NBDC focus and work on linkages across scales
 * Be concrete, be clear, give detail! Use evidence and it's gotta be good
 * Messages are vague and rhetorical: messages can be enriched (if they are to be taken up in 2013)
 * Start from existing institutional system and match recommendations
 * Identify gaps (CR4D) - drivers include: climate change population etc.
 * Menu of technologies/options: Get clear on what is out there already!
 * What are mechanisms for technology transfer?
 * Bring together the Africa experience!
 * Messages are already known so what is different? Don't duplicate: Offer specifics and good targeting
 * Better - good - documentation, lessons learnt. packaging for scaling up (methodologies) --> capacity building
 * Smooth transfer of ownership to relevant stakeholders
 * Build upon lessons on sustainability of outcomes
 * R4D messages - learning
 * Hardware!!!

Feedback about current NBDC approaches and tools
//Participants were invited to a bus stop to find out about seven different approaches and tools tried out/tested in NBDC and to have a chance to ask a few questions. Stand owners had to capture the key comments made.//

**Monitoring**

 * Baseline assessment
 * Qualitative
 * Quantitative
 * Social, economic and biophysical
 * Protocols - NMA and MoWE
 * M + E - IP's
 * Baseline - intervention - impact - scenario
 * M& E how do we make sure quality control
 * Longevity and value – to keep it going – some to be supported by the CG system and ARARI and universities in Bahir Dar and Ambo

Innovation platforms

 * How to sustain?
 * What is the innovation?
 * Multi/trans-displinary
 * Who takes initiative/innovation broker
 * Align with government system (local + national )
 * Smart incentive
 * Build on existing knowledge (even-though mixed scattered evidence of success)
 * Local IP seem to focus on a few issues while NBD - Challenge is much wider

GIS, Goblet tool and suitability maps

 * Inclusion of adoption map
 * To make the tool easily available

Wat-a-Game / Happy strategies

 * What is new? Existing PRA tools are similar?
 * Two tools are complementary - should be combined
 * Potential to be used at local level
 * Issues of literacy to be considered
 * How can results be documented + shared?
 * Two should be used in combination
 * Good to produce more tailored interventions
 * Need for good documentation processes
 * Expert validation required of farmer strategies debatable
 * Could compliment other capacity building exercises
 * Good to break down barriers between actors + build mutual understanding
 * Happy strategies - change the name
 * Can it be used by DA's?
 * Look at IWMI working paper (Langford) on similar game
 * How to package + make useable

Modeling

 * Include forests/vegetation cover
 * Modeling needs to be scalable
 * Feedback from crop Wat - SWAT/WEAP
 * Ecological benefits; e.g. rice production
 * Many proxies can be used as indicators

Digital stories

 * Quantification of the biomass
 * The digital film concentrates around the homestreads (arrangement) focus on the landscape
 * Brief explanation of the topic to be recorded (like Desho grass) is important for the audience to easily understand.
 * Introduction of the programme (how the process) is going on is important.
 * Criteria of farmer's selection.
 * Next plan to share like digital stories to farmers and other users on the ground
 * In using digital story in an effective way it will help to the scaling up of best practices/technologies at a broader scale.
 * Intervention should be in an integrated manner (focus on different species).
 * SWC practice with respect to minimum or zero tillage is important in addition to introduction of grass species.
 * Include the scientific name
 * Amount of produced per ha
 * Who is going to share this digital story and how this can be easily disseminated to the end users (farmers, public services like TV, FTC, school etc)
 * Impact (before and after intervention)
 * Care on the message/market

Local planning process

 * 3 DAs - good system, but problems of:
 * Capacity + practical knowledge
 * Diversification to other activities
 * Message capacity, incentives
 * Science seen as superior to farmers knowledge + values + local institutional message integrate knowledge
 * Limited cross-sectoral integration
 * incentives
 * Quara system
 * Message incentives
 * Incentives all output based (no structures built etc) not outcome- based (quality; results, livelihood benefits NR improvements)
 * Little follow up or learning about what works and what doesn't
 * Interventions less effective and sustainable (message, incentives, learning)


 * Research done early in the project
 * To understand in detail how local decisions are made + how policy is translated into practice
 * Is local planning
 * Evidence based?
 * Participatory?
 * Cross-sectoral?
 * Tailored to local environments + livelihoods?
 * What does local innovation capacity look like? (inform IP design)

Group work on individual messages
//After hearing the general set of messages and the approaches tried, the facilitator invited participants to work in groups - according to their interest - on the individual messages formulated. They worked on it and presented these messages back to the whole group on day 2 in a plenary session. Group results are available below.// >
 * Group 1 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 1 Community leadership.docx|Results]]
 * Audio media type="file" key="WS550500.WMA"




 * Group 2 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 2 Local and scientific knowledge.docx|Results]]
 * Audio media type="file" key="WS550502.WMA" width="300" height="45"




 * Group 3 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 3 Facilitating learning processes.docx|Results]]
 * Audio media type="file" key="WS550504.WMA" width="300" height="45"


 * Group 4 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 4 Incentives.docx|Results]]
 * Audio media type="file" key="WS550505.WMA" width="300" height="45"


 * Group 5 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 5 Capacity Strengthening.docx|Results]]
 * Audio media type="file" key="WS550507.WMA" width="300" height="45"




 * Group 6 - [[file:Reflection4 - message 6 Learning and planning tools.xlsx|Results]]
 * Audio media type="file" key="WS550508.WMA" width="300" height="45"



Fishbowl discussion about NBDC and the policy context of Ethiopia
//The questions asked were: 1) Given today’s realities in Ethiopia and across the Nile Basin – climate change, demographic changes, energy needs, economic pressures and investor priorities … - how relevant is the NBDC really in contributing to priority development changes? 2) What role should the NBDC play at national and regional levels from now till end 2013? //

The demographic trend on population dynamics is challenging. Climate change is affecting livelihoods highly  degradation of natural resources and agriculture contributes highly to this (livestock, crop, soil fertility decline etc.). What are the implications for basin issues? NBDC does research for development. Many issues come up and have to be scaled up: water recharge, using irrigation to intensify agriculture. Are these scalable interventions? Research is happening in other regions and countries: Shall we use a platform to exchange experiences? The database we are building could be used for scaling up. The contribution of NBDC could be on specific project areas, and could focus on augmenting information and packaging it to make it usable by local people.

NBDC is relevant. We face a global challenge: food security. Ethiopia is affected by climate change and we can work on water resources (water storage, distribution etc.) but it’s knowledge-intensive. R&D capacity is weak in Ethiopia and we need more knowledge/innovation-intensive initiatives. There are many initiatives for food security, use of water for agricultural and domestic uses etc. We have to make innovation and knowledge available and contribute to policy dialogue with riparian countries. NBDC can influence policy dialogue and scientific approaches.

Our work contributes to indigenous/scientific knowledge. At regional government level, we pick up these ideas. R4D should be action research, not research to feed peer-reviewed journals. The NBDC dataset can be synthesized and repackaged for grassroots level. This can be scaled up. NBDC can intervene. At grassroots level, we want to increase production and productivity and ensure food security with water. In Diga, dry spells last up to 9 months.

There is degradation of natural resources in Ethiopia. To change the current scenario, the Government of Ethiopia has various strategies nationally and regionally. We have been struggling over the past 30 years to change practices. More recently the GoE had been working with a think tank and our leadership’s accepted the idea of water-centred growth, prioritizing the Abay watershed for different purposes: tourism, irrigation, livestock, domestic uses etc. R4D should be aligned with this. NBDC has been piloting some work in this area. NBDC is relevant but the missing link is the regional coordination mechanism. NBDC has to repackage its information to use it at regional level (and other levels). What is the institutional influence of NBDC? How can we sustain arrangements set up by NBDC? We have to inform policy and institutionalize work at various levels to influence policy and practices.

When technology is adopted, it means it is benefiting farmers. We have to build up on local knowledge and look beyond hardware. Farmers are doing some research e.g. on Chat.

There is indeed a regional gap in NBDC. We have been working at local and national level but not there. We should bring our messages to regional platforms. Perhaps a zone wants to take some of our work up? NBDC welcomes this kind of engagement.

NBDC should try and apply its work in other areas. How could it work in other areas? You need to prepare an exit strategy and think about resource mobilization for scaling up. You have to focus to make this project continue! Demographics and economics are changing the situation on the ground and we have to restore ecosystems.

We have to move from small pilot projects to scaling up  what role do we see for international (vs. national) centres?  The role of international centres is to develop capacities of the national system to handle research and innovation issues.

Demography and climate change in Ethiopia are affecting the country. What are the implications for the NBDC?

Reviewing NRM in Ethiopia, looking at the current situation compared with 50-60 years ago, a lot of springs have dried up and we need to go fetch water much further way. There is an immense problem and our efforts are only limited. What is the sustainability of the program? This project contributes little to the gigantic problem. We have to work on this project and we should focus on many other basins than just the Nile basin e.g. The Omo basin. We have to move further.

Land degradation is immense but our research system doesn’t understand this. There is a huge campaign from the government. It feels top-down but it is due to the magnitude of the problem. When your house is on fire, you don’t negotiate how to address this, you act! In the past 3-4 years, about 15 springs have disappeared. We have to learn from this. Research should be reflecting on this. NBDC has done and compiled a lot of information. We have to make our work scalable. Where are the areas where we can scale up our work?

We have to use our knowledge into development processes, get close to policy-making. Dejene, Fantahun etc. are close to those circles and can take our messages further.

Climate change, population etc. are drivers but do these affect the situation on the ground? Sustainable intensification of the system is required. One single technology cannot be taken up. We have to look at complementary technologies and services.

Some research messages are still emerging.

Let’s look beyond 2013! What is your exit strategy? Technology has no end. These two days are paramount to evaluate the program. Water harvesting remains a critical challenge. Which issues require technological/political inputs? The right action would be to develop a brief from this workshop, to make the perspectives from this workshop palatable and the actions clear for this year and beyond 2013.

Final messages from our participants
//Participants were invited to craft a message for either Ato Seleshi (Ministry of Agriculture - representing the GoE and NARS), Fran çois Onimus (World Bank leader for Irrigation in Africa - representing the donor community), Frank Rijsberman (CEO of CGIAR), Tigist Gebremariam (fictitious female farmer in Jeldu) or the team of workshop organizers (Simon Langan, Alan Duncan, Kees Swaans, Belay Yazew, Ewen Le Borgne). //


 * To François Onimus (World Bank)**:
 * Small scale irrigation can ensure the food security of smallholder farmers. Therefore, please commission the CPWF-NBDC project to address the existing problem in Ethiopia.
 * You should support water management in Nile Basin via NBDC3
 * If you want to have impact, build on existing evidence and invest in RWM in the Nile Basin.


 * To Ato Seleshi (Ministry of Agriculture)**:
 * Strengthen knowledge transfer system
 * Scaling up relevant technologies in sense of urgency
 * Documenting and sustaining references at national level
 * You know projects like NBDC use mainly a watershed approach which encompasses many of our agricultural components, crop, livestock, forestry, soils and others, which determine our agricultural productivity, so please open door and services for other related projects.
 * Complementary technologies and services are essential to make NRM technologies effective
 * All natural resource management initiatives in general and rainwater management in particular should ensure community empowerment and leadership
 * We need to establish landscape (or watershed) based on long term monitoring sites in a typical Nile Basin. This will help future prediction of situations based on data generated on any aspect of interest in NRM.
 * Build an incentive mechanism in favor of all stakeholders to ensure sustainable implementation of your strategy.Community-driven NRM process need to be ensured in policy and practice. This requires a major change in mindset among development actors throughout the hierarchy – this requires a major capacity development effort.
 * A variety of water harvesting rainwater management technologies that can be taken up by smallholder farmers with their active participation exists. A lot of information about these is available at NBDC and their partners; as well as tools for selecting and targeting them.
 * Craft NRM policy based on scientific and local knowledge in a participatory manner.


 * To Tigist Gebremariam, farmer in Jeldu**:
 * We will start listening to and acting on what you say – Practical Action
 * How far the knowledge you get from NBDC is relevant to your life?
 * Keep on doing and share to others your learning
 * Rain water harvesting is the technology which enhance production and productivity, please conserve our soil and water by using technology.
 * What incentives will provoke you to adopt RWM strategies? We like to start from your problems and incentives.


 * To Frank Rijsberman (CGIAR)**:
 * To create a system of all CGIAR system coordination and engagement with the national research and development system – looks uncoordinated efforts not rep. at RED/Fs SLM TC and AGP/WU.
 * Research for development/action research
 * Action research is what is required by national partners.
 * CGIAR like to use projects to further develop our tools but we need to pass them on to local and regional researchers to a valid debate and further develop them.
 * Development or implementation to demonstrate evidences and impact


 * To the organizing team**:

Final words by Simon and Alan

 * Simon: Looking back...**
 * There was disagreement on scientific knowledge - we need to work further on this.
 * Incentives: big buy-in and interest and sthg that NBDC could take forward.
 * Capacity strengthening: concrete interest to build upon
 * Planning and evaluation tools:
 * NBDC should reach out to ENTRO, a major stakeholders in the future of RWM in the Nile Basin.
 * 8 messages that will go to 6
 * Empowerment- need to look
 * Indigenous – disagreement need to revisit it
 * Facilitated learning – look at it further
 * Capacity – a lot of interest but needs assessment
 * Facilitated learning – look at it further
 * Capacity – a lot of interest but needs assessment


 * Need to review the ones below:
 * Implementation at regional level
 * International collaboration
 * Under all these messages there is evidence –
 * We have produced primary data – rainfall data and others
 * Unpack in 2013
 * Check the exist strategy
 * Ato Seleshi was keen that we take it to the SLM

Implementation at national/regional level featured in the fish bowl and we need to work further on this in the future.

In terms of reflections, Nile Basin is one of 3 African basins. We have been working from our 5 initial projects to develop 8 messages. Over the next few weeks we will revise those messages in the light of what we learnt these past two days. Underneath each message is a series of evidence. We need to look at the evidence we have and see if we have changed practices (how?), see if we have the right data for it, the set of demonstrations from our IPs, the tools (Happy Strategies, Wat-A-Game) and we need to unpack these 8 messages. We also have to think about our basin exit strategy and how this feeds back into the other basins that are part of the Challenge Program for Water and Food.

This today and yesterday was a National Platform meeting. During the introductory session, Ato Seleshi mentioned that he would like to see the NBDC join hands with SLM. We need to revise our work around this National Platform.

We will refine the messages and then use these messages. We still have some thinking to do there to benefit policies and practices. There could be some form of policy engagement. Ato Dejene is part of RED FS. We may produce some policy b riefs and reflect on smart ways to support policies (e.g. face-to-face)? We talked about the regional gap and we have some plans to bring some messages at that level. We have planned a regional level in July in Bahir Dar.
 * Alan: What's next? **

Part of this process was about strengthening the evidence. Part of our mandate now is to bridge those gaps and build that evidence, which could involve some review of current work, some other work, some upcoming 'learning events'.

How do we make sure that this work carries on beyond 2013? We hope to come up with tailored approaches e.g. CGIAR is rolling out large research programs (e.g. Water, Land and Ecosystems). There is potential for some of this work to be sustained through this program. There are also some smaller scale initiatives e.g. hydrological work. Re: innovation platforms we want to see if local NGOs can take this over.

We've had a little focus on gender, which was not written in the design of this program. We need to take some thinking from Cathy into the final phase of the program. Finally, this was our second last meeting as NBDC. We plan a final meeting later in the year which would be under the auspices of the national land and water management platform. There could be some learning events around this and some cross-basin opportunities for joint learning and capitalization.

Appreciation for your active engagement in this meeting. Quality has been excellent in the discussions. Thank you very much for coming and we look forward to coming back.

(Personal notes from Alan Duncan about 'next steps')
 * Doug will revise the key messages; we may need to specify message based on target group
 * Engage at the policy level; at the moment Belay is exploring how these message (the supply) relate to development at the policy level (the demand)
 * May lead to direct input in frameworks/strategy documents currently being developed/drafted
 * Direct engagement with policy level (informal, think tanks etc.)
 * Use different media/policy briefs, etc.
 * Key results/messages will be presented at a B asin level platform meeting planned in July 2013 with strong focus on regional involvement—Place: Bahir Dar where the Basin Authority head office is based.
 * The results of this workshop could provide input for a National Platform meeting in the 2nd half of the year (although exact topic has not been decided).
 * Some of the issues raised, which may be relatively weak in terms of evidence or which needs further exploration, will be followed up this year by the NBDC; this can be through:
 * New activities
 * Reviewing current work/documents/literature
 * TWG learning events which can focus on specific issues to document experiences among various organizations, e,g. on gender, incentives, or participatory tools/methods….but any suggestions are welcome.
 * There will be separate activities/follow up to discuss how activities can be sustained beyond 2013 through ILRI/IWMI and/or other stakeholders:
 * In relation to (biophysical) monitoring
 * Participatory planning tools
 * The modeling
 * The local innovation platforms
 * The national platform
 * At the end of the year there will be a final NBDC meeting, in which there will be space to present the work of the NBDC in more detail and share experiences between the three African basins. (not sure whether other basins have already committed themselves to this).

Organizers' agenda