This approach assumes that CGIAR Centers can act as catalysts to attract new or align existing development investments (including by the private sector). It also assumes that different research partners will work together to support development partners as they implement major development interventions in the targeted meat, milk and fish value chains.
Can CGIAR Centers offer sufficient added value for development donors and actors, including the private sector, to make this approach work? Please comment: What we would need to do for this to happen in an effective, sustainable and equitable manner?
Share your comments below:
Return to the List of Questions for week 1
CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish 
Yes CGIAR can certainly add value to other actors if the entire value chain is critically analysed and addressed holistically in each of the countries.Omissions in the past have neglected key components, especially in under-developed markets to the detriment of the entire chain.
Yes, CGIAR centers shall offer sufficient added value for development partners and the private sector through its rich base of scientists/technicians by imparting new and appropriate production enhancing technologies.
This shall require framing a policy at center/state level in each country to bring together different actors together. Individual contact with different actors for involvement in project implementation is not going to work effectively in developing countries. They need directives from the central governing body.
It may also be important to keep the working partners to minimum and selecting the most relevant ones.
CGIAR centersw can offer sufficient aded value by first harmonizing all the existing development investments for the purpose of effective implementation and increased participation.
PRIVATE SECTOR REPRESENTED BY PRODUCER ORGANIZATIONS IN LAC IS THE MOST SUITABLE ACTOR TO LEAD THE DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT OF THE R4D STRATEGY WITH A VISION OF VALUE ADDED CHAIN.
MOST COUNTRIES IN THE REGION HOLD ALREADY WELL FUNCTIONING VALUE CHAINS IN DIFFERENT COMMODITIES COORDINATED BY PRODUCER ORGANIZATIONS UNDER THE GOVERNMENT UMBRELLA. NOT MUCH SO IN LIVESTOCK AND AQUACULTURE. THE INSTITUTIONAL AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT IS STILL MISSING FOR AFSs. MEGAPROJECT TO HELP PROMOTE RIGHT SETTINGS THROUGH STRATEGIC PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.
To catalyse, the project participants have to understand the needs (and capacities) of public and private partners, as well as to generate the respective knowledge. Further, the cg-center has to provide the institution and manpower to communicate and interact with partners (e.g. “partnership liason officer”).
The proposal provides approaches to assess partnerships, but it is not clear how to “interact”
Definitely. If such interventions are preceded by well thought out and thorough needs assessment in order to tailor make the intervetions to meet the needs of communities and/or NGOs and development agencies
CGIAR centres have the “clout” to be able to do serious research (and research that will be taken seriously) on issues related to access to land and other natural resources by poor peoples, especially women, who (want to) keep livestock and fish.
Communication strategy will be of great importance. The language / flow etc must be non technical / simple and specific to target audience. Orientation of people within CGIAR system (across all level) must change. Each CGIAR institutes must focus on building multidisciplinary teams. Champions in each CGIAR establishments must be empowered (for negotiations and quick decision making)
Few other important aspects are transparency in partnership and open (priced) access to information within CGIAR system.
I agree .CG centres to create a forum of expertise to work with relevant partners in livestock research and extension
Yes I believe with commitment and proper coordination the CGs can make this approach work!
Yes, I think that CGIAR Centers can offer sufficient added value for development donors and actors. Particularly, if they pay more attention to the causes of success and failure of livestock development projects.