Middle East Water and Livelihoods Initiative
Improving Rural Livelihoods through Sustainable Water
and Land-use Management
In Middle East Countries: Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon,
Palestine, Syria and Yemen
July 2009
Contact: Contact: Scott Christiansen
ICARDA, P.O. Box 5466, Aleppo, Syria
Tel: +963-21 2213433 x 2205
Fax: +963-21 2225105
Cell: +963-94 4428356
Email: s.christiansen@cgiar.org
List of Acronyms
ADG-ICC: Assistant DG for International Cooperation and Communication (ICARDA)
AFESD: Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development (Arab Fund)
AGNEP: Agricultural Non-point Source Model
ANU: An Najah University (Palestine)
ARC: Agriculture Research Council (Egypt)
AREA: Agricultural Research and Extension Authority (Yemen)
ARIJ: Applied Research Institute - Jerusalem (Palestine)
AU: Aleppo University (Syria)
AUB: American University of Beirut (Lebanon)
AUC: American University of Cairo (Egypt)
ASU: Ain Shams University (Egypt)
ASU: BU: Benha University (Egypt)
BOT: Board of Trustees
BU: Benha University
CBO: Community-based Organization
CD: Compact Disc
CGIAR: Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
CTO: Cognizant Technical Officer (USAID)
CU: Cairo University
CV: Curriculum Vitae
CWANA: Central and West Asia and North Africa
DC: District of Columbia (USA)
DDC: Desert Development Center in the AUC (Egypt)
DDG-R: Deputy Director General for Research (ICARDA)
DG: Director General
DSS: Decision-Support System
DU: Damascus University
DVD: Digital Video Disc
ELC: E-Learning Committee
EPIC: Erosion Productivity Impact Calculator
FA1: Farmer Association
FIG: Farmer Interest Groups
GCSAR: General Commission for Scientific Agricultural Research (Syria)
GEF: Global Environment Facility
GIS: Geographic Information Systems
GW: Ground Water
HU: Hebron University (Palestine)
HV: High Value
IAER: Iraq Agriculture Extension Revitalization (USDA)
ICARDA: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
ICT: Information and Communications Technology
IFAD: International Fund for Agricultural Development
IFPRI: International Food Policy Research Institute
INRM: Integrated Natural Resource Management
IWLMP: Integrated Water and Land Management Program (ICARDA)
IWM: Integrated Watershed Management
IWMI: International Water Management Institute
1
Unless otherwise specified the term farmer is taken to include men and women in this proposal.
JUST: Jordan University of Science and Technology.
KS: Knowledge Sharing
LARI: Lebanese Agricultural Research Institute (Lebanon)
LAU: Lebanese American University
LOP: Life of Program
LRC: Land Research Center (Palestine)
M&E: Monitoring and Evaluation
MAAR: Ministry of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform (Syria)
MAI: Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation (Yemen)
MALR: Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation (Egypt)
MAS: Multiple Agent System
MIP: Modernization of Irrigation Project (Syria)
MWRI: Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation (Egypt)
MC: Management Committee at ICARDA
ME: Middle East
MOA: Ministry of Agriculture
MOU: Memorandum of Understanding
MU: Mosul University
MWI: Ministry of Water and Irrigation (Jordan)
MS: Master of Science Degree
NARC: National Agricultural Research Center (Palestine)
NARES: National Research and Extension Systems
NC: National Coordinator
NCARE: National Center for Agricultural Research and Extension (Jordan)
NCARTT: National Center for Agricultural Research and Technology Transfer (Jordan)
NGO: Non-Government Organization
NRCS: Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA)
NRM: Natural Resource Management
NTC: National Technical Committee
NWRA: National Water Resources Authority (Yemen)
NWRC: National Water Research Center (Egypt)
OFID: OPEC Fund for International Development
OMEP: Office of Middle East Programs (USAID)
OPEC: Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OFID Fund)
OVI: Objectively Verifiable Indicators
PAPP: Program of Assistance to the Palestinian People (UNDP)
PhD: Doctorate of Philosophy Degree
PM: Project Manager
PMU: Project Management Unit
PRA: Participatory Rural Appraisal
PSC: Project Steering Committee
RS: Remote Sensing
SAG: Site Advisory Group
SEPR: Socio-Economic and Policy Research Program (ICARDA)
SBAR: State Board for Agricultural Research (in Iraq’s MOA)
SHG: Self-Help Groups
SREP: Strategic Research and Extension Plan
S&T: Science and Technology
SWAP: Soil-Water-Atmosphere-Plant Model
SWP: Soil and Water Productivity
SWOT: Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats Analysis
TAMU: Texas A&M University
TS: Technical Support (Office of Technical Support in USAID Washington)
UA: University of Aden (Yemen)
UB: University of Baghdad (Iraq)
UCD: University of California at Davis
UCR: University of California at Riverside
UJ: University of Jordan
UF: University of Florida
US: University of Sana’a (Yemen)
UIUC: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
UNDP: United Nations Development Program
USAID: United States Agency for International Development
USDA: United States Department of Agriculture
USU: Utah State University
UZ: University of Zagazig (Egypt)
WANA: West Asia North Africa
WERSC: Water and Environment Research and Study Center (Jordan)
WLI: Water and Livelihoods Initiative
WUA: Water Users Association
ZU: Zagazig University (Egypt)
The Middle East Water and Livelihoods Initiative: A Process
The WLI timeline reflects the extent to which the WLI’s
genesis and planning became a process. What began as a
concept in 2007 has become a network of formal linkages
among the WLI’s international stakeholders. Their inputs
and ownership is reflected in eight bilateral and an
overarching regional proposal.
The key components of the original concept were: (a) a
decision-support and scenario testing model for water
allocation; (b) improved livelihoods through higher value
crops and livestock and reoriented extension systems, (c)
ICARDA’s and in-depth partnerships with dry-area
countries and benchmark sites concept, (d) knowledge
sharing and scaling-up strategies, and (e) existing applied
research on land and water management technologies and
partnership with key US universities with expertise in the
region for post graduate training in US universities.
These components still form the backbone of the WLI but
have been enriched, synthesized and adapted into an
approach which is specifically tailored to the needs of
each country while aligning similar programs across
countries. The approach takes into consideration that to be
truly sustainable, capacity must be enhanced at all levels
in the region and must stay and be applied in the region
and that the end goal of the improvement of livelihoods
must be borne in mind through each activity. Hence the
emphasis on e-learning, on regional and national
universities, the use of decision-support modelling only
where the input can be directly utilized and practically
applied by decision-makers, the use of short courses and
training across all levels of the benchmark sites with
emphasis on flexibility and access, the inclusion of
farmers in the decision-making process and management
structure through the Site Advisory Groups (SAGs) and
the insistence of maximising and building on what has
been created before.
The series of documents in this package are a reflection of
this process, showing the genuine participation and
contributions of the partners, the evolution of thinking and
ideas and the synthesis of knowledge, experience and
recommendations through the series of workshops and
editorial reviews, resulting in the bilateral and regional
proposals as they stand in their current form.
The WLI Submission Package contains the WLI
2009 Regional Proposal and 8 Bilateral Proposals:
Irrigated Benchmark Sites (Egypt, Iraq, Yemen);
Rainfed Benchmark Sites (Northern Iraq, Lebanon,
Syria) and Rangeland Benchmark Sites (Jordan and
Palestine).
WLI Timeline 2007-2009
2007
23 Jun 2007 UIUC Framework / Trip
Report
08 Aug 2007 Update to partners in US
universities
30 Sep 2007 NARES identified
2008
17 Jan 2008 NARES contacted and
contracted writer (Helen Bradbury) for
WLI proposal
12 May 2008 visit to USAID-Washington for
approval to use $10,000 from the USAIDUIUC Linking Farmers to Markets grant
26 May 2008 Inception Workshop announced
7-9 Jul 2008 Inception Workshop Aleppo
16 Sep 2008 Submission of WLI start up
proposal to USAID-Washington
09 Oct 2008 USAID Washington grants
$350,000 of $500,000 request
23 Oct briefing visit to USAID Lebanon
06 Nov briefing visit to USAID Egypt and
OMEP
13 Nov 2008 Briefing visit to USAID Jordan
23 Nov 2008 USAID-OMEP grants $150,000
for WLI -- allowing full funding for the start
up phase
19 Dec 2008 coordination with US
universities by teleconference to plan
2009 work
2009
05 Feb 2009 coordination with US
universities by teleconference to decide
workshop participation
07-09 Apr 2009 Cairo Irrigated Workshop
05-07 May 2009 Aleppo Rainfed Workshop
12-14 May 2009 Amman Badia Workshop
19 Jun 2009 teleconference with US
universities to plan edits to proposals
21 Jun WLI website construction in progress
01 Jul 2009 Letters of support for proposal
submission requested from all partners
13-16 Jul 2009 Briefing visit to USAID
Baghdad
01 Aug 2009 submission of proposals by
ICARDA to USAID/Washington for
transmittal to OMEP and Missions
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.
BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.2.
1.2.1
1.3
1.3.1
1.3.1.1
1.3.1.2
1.3.1.3
1.3.2
1.3.3
APPROACH: BUILDING ON KEY STRENGTHS .............................................................................................. 5
Building on Existing Relationships................................................................................................... 5
Knowledge Sharing Strategy ........................................................................................................... 5
The Integrated Benchmark Approach and Scaling Up .................................................................... 6
The Benchmark Sites ....................................................................................................................... 8
Workshop Outputs for the Benchmark sites ................................................................................. 11
TRAINING ......................................................................................................................................... 11
Delivery: International and Regional Partnerships and E-learning .............................................. 14
Needs and Resource Matching: The WLI Portal ...................................................................... 15
Post Graduate Degrees and Short Courses .............................................................................. 16
Professional Societies and Post-Doctoral Opportunities .......................................................... 17
Regional Hub Universities and Regional Training ......................................................................... 17
US Universities: A Consortium Approach and Comparative Advantages ...................................... 18
2.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE LINKAGES ..................................................................................................... 20
3.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................. 20
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.5.1
3.5.2
3.5.3
3.5.4
3.5.4.1
3.5.4.2
3.5.4.3
3.5.4.4
3.5.4.5
3.5.4.6
3.5.4.7
3.5.4.8
3.5.4.9
3.5.4.10
3.5.5
3.5.6
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................... 20
GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS .......................................................................................................................... 21
COMPONENTS ................................................................................................................................... 21
EXPECTED RESULTS ............................................................................................................................ 27
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................................. 27
GENDER ........................................................................................................................................... 27
ENVIRONMENTAL............................................................................................................................... 27
COORDINATION WITH OTHER USAID AND NON USAID PROJECTS .............................................................. 28
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION: WLI ........................................................................... 28
Legal and Fiduciary Responsibility ........................................................................................... 28
The Project Steering Committee (PSC) ..................................................................................... 28
ICARDA Management Committee (MC) ................................................................................... 29
National Coordinator (NC), Site Advisory Group (SAG), and National Tech Committee (NTC) 29
Project Management Unit (PMU) ............................................................................................ 30
Program Manager .................................................................................................................... 30
Training Coordinator ................................................................................................................ 30
CGIAR Centers .......................................................................................................................... 32
NARES ....................................................................................................................................... 32
US Universities: Enhancement and Collaboration .................................................................... 33
MONITORING AND EVALUATION ........................................................................................................... 34
RESPONSIBILITIES AND RELATIONSHIPS ................................................................................................... 37
4.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................ 38
5.
OTHER INFORMATION .......................................................................................................................... 39
6.
PROGRAM TEAM .................................................................................................................................. 40
7.
SUBSTANTIAL INVOLVEMENT ............................................................................................................... 40
8.
KEY PERSONNEL .................................................................................................................................... 41
9.
COST SHARING...................................................................................................................................... 41
10.
GANTT CHART .................................................................................................................................. 41
APPENDIX 2: LOGFRAME WLI ........................................................................................................................ 48
APPENDIX 3: US UNIVERSITIES COMPARATIVE RESEARCH ADVANTAGE, SPECIALIZATIONS AND MIDDLE EAST
EXPERIENCE ................................................................................................................................................... 52
Executive Summary
The Middle East Water and Livelihood Initiative (WLI) has arisen as a direct consequence of
the single largest concern facing farm households and rural communities of the Middle East;
the continuing inefficient use of water and consequent on-going degradation of agroecosystems. In the seven countries of the initiative; Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine,
Syria and Yemen, water scarcity is the key constraint to the improvement of rural livelihoods
that are mainly dependent on land productivity. It is the fundamental issue threatening
economic development, food security and stability in many parts of the region and must be
addressed for improvements to take place.
Current institutional resources needed to address these problems in the seven countries of the
WLI are presently ill equipped to do so. There is a gap between fragmented agricultural and
natural resource management research and the adoption and adaptation of findings by
farmers. Current water and land-use policies are often inappropriate to reverse these trends
and human capacity too is in decline with a shortage of trained personnel and ageing human
resources within national agricultural research and extension organizations and universities.
Leaving these problems unresolved will result in a progressively worsening crisis within the
rural ecosystems of the countries of the WLI with serious long-term social, political and
economic implications.
There is however, a widespread recognition of the mutual need to husband and manage the
water and land resources through greater engagement of stakeholders while renewing human
capital for future generations. The planning phase of the WLI which has encompassed the
WLI inception workshop in June 2008 and the series of workshops based on agro-ecosystems
in 20092 has capitalised on this recognition. The WLI builds upon the impulse to mobilise
resources and effect change through mutual cooperation across national boundaries and has
begun the development of the framework, through which change will be achieved.
The goal of the WLI is to improve the livelihoods of rural households and communities in
areas where water scarcity, land degradation, water quality deterioration, food security and
health problems are prevalent in the seven participating countries, focusing initially on
specific benchmark sites.
New income-generating crop and livestock strategies will be introduced in the context of
sustainable and appropriate production technologies, market chain development and strong
farmer-based organizations which focus on the priority issues and cross-cutting issues
identified in the 2009 agro-ecological workshops. The generic areas of discussion specific to
each agro-ecological benchmark and priority technical areas and cross-cutting issues for the
seven participating countries were identified and prioritised at the series of agro-ecological
workshops and can be found on pages 8 and 9.
Human capital will be replenished through an extensive and innovative training program
which will make the most of the latest in telecommunications technology and e-learning
methods to target all levels, from farmers to PhDs, working in the integrated benchmark sites
in the priority technical areas and cross cutting issues identified at the Cairo workshop. Policy
decisions will be informed by institutional capacity building in tandem with decision-support
2
6-9 April 2009 Cairo -- Irrigated: Egypt, Iraq and Yemen. 5-7 May 2009 Aleppo -- Rainfed: Lebanon and
Syria. 10-12 May 2009 Amman -- Rangelands: Jordan and Palestine.
1
technology. The challenge and crux of the initiative is to achieve these improvements while
reversing current trends in the overuse of water and the stabilizing of the ecosystems in which
the livelihoods are based through sustainable water and land use management.
The initiative will concentrate on self-reliance and enhancement of capacity of the
implementing partners: harnessing the regional expertise and established relationships of
ICARDA, IFPRI and IWMI, the educational and research strengths and linkages in the region
of the US universities and the in-country knowledge and human capital of multiple
stakeholders at the benchmark site. Key stakeholders at the benchmark sites include, regional
and national universities, farmers, extensionists, students, INGOs, NGO’s and CBOs
(community-based organizations). These will influence the work plan, management and
outcomes at the benchmark sites through membership in the Site Advisory Groups (SAG) in
conjunction with the National Technical Committee and National Coordinator.
The strength of the WLI is its emphasis on the use of existing data, social capital, research,
linkages, partnerships and proven methodologies and technologies in the Middle East3,
adapting and creating as new only where necessary. This will ensure that the goal of the
WLI, improvements to livelihoods, will be created on a continuum from the beginning of the
project.
The outputs of the WLI in each country will be achieved through the pilot tested integrated
water and land-use management strategies developed for scaling up at the benchmark sites.
Implementation of the project will be achieved through the process of training MS and PhD
students alongside the current generation of researchers, extensionists and politicians – much
like on-the-job training. The successful strategies will then be replicated at national levels
following a scaling-up4 strategy implemented through partnerships with policy-makers.
Outputs: The WLI initiative is expected to produce the following direct outputs:
1. Integrated water and land-use strategies for policy-making, tools for sustainable
benchmark management and organizational mechanisms for community inclusion at the
benchmark site.
2. Enhanced knowledge, skills and qualifications for key stakeholders in the benchmark sites.
3. Improved rural livelihoods of farmers in the benchmark sites through the adoption of
sustainable land and water management practices and livelihood strategies.
Outcomes: The initiative is expected to achieve the following outcomes:
1. Income increased in rural households/villages.
2. New livelihoods adapted/diversified production systems adopted.
3. Access to clean, high quality water improved by adoption of better water management
systems.
4. Natural resources managed better at community and institutional levels.
5. Land use intensified, decreasing pressure to move agriculture to new or fragile lands.
6. Status of land degradation and water quality monitored.
7. Improved capacity of extension and research institutions.
3
4
ICARDA has a successful current Water Benchmark Project for CWANA, funded by AFESD (8/200212/2007), IFAD (8/2004-9/2008) and the OPEC Fund (4/2006-6/2009), that provides two existing
benchmarks (Irrigated Benchmark in Egypt; Badia Benchmark in Jordan) so methods of identification,
characterization, monitoring and evaluation are well established for use in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria and
Yemen.
See the original 2008 WLI proposal p9 for a full description of the scaling-up strategy.
2
1.
Background
The WLI is a regional initiative involving seven countries; Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon,
Palestine, Syria and Yemen, thirteen NARES institutions across those countries, three
international agricultural research centers, a group of regional hub universities, national
universities and five US university systems. The 2008 WLI Inception Workshop brought
together representatives of all participating institutions and marked the culmination of a long
period of planning initiated by ICARDA5 and key personnel from US universities in response
to the chronic problem of water scarcity in the region and the relative lack of progress that
had been made in the region in improving the livelihoods of rural households. The initiative
was designed to focus on increased income generating opportunities whilst reversing the
degradation of watersheds through sustainable water and land management strategies.
The 2008 workshop harnessed the growing awareness among key players in the region, of the
need for mutual cooperation to husband and manage water and land resources through greater
engagement of stakeholders, whilst renewing human capital for future generations. The
workshop proved the desire for country level and regional strategies to improve water
productivity and income and verified the need for a new generation of policymakers, scientists and extension personnel. It was agreed that there was an essential need for
education and in-service training for young and mid-career scientists and extensionists. The
workshop allowed a face-to-face gathering which pulled together detailed information about
sites, partners, constraints and potential solutions in each of the seven Middle Eastern
countries. Defining the characteristics of benchmark sites was useful as a way of organizing
and grouping the water and livelihood problems by agro-ecology6. Decision-support
modelling was deemed necessary, but only so far as it could be used with simplicity and
clarity to decide the best path to more profit per drop of water. It was agreed to use bottom-up
and market-driven participatory methodologies to be focused in the benchmark site
communities.
The 2008 WLI Inception workshop led to the finalising of the WLI proposal and the initiation
of the next phase of planning enabled by the $350,000 grant from USAID/ANE Washington 7
and a $150,000 grant from the Office of Middle East Programs in Cairo, Egypt to initiate the
WLI in each of the participating countries in the 2008/2009 season including carrying out a
series of three workshops based on the agro-ecosystems identified in the inception phase,
which would further define priorities and define and develop synergies between countries and
5
6
7
Water is the number one priority in ICARDA's Strategic Plan for 2007/2016.
The definitions of the three agro-eco systems of the WLI according to ICARDA 2008:
Irrigated: An irrigated agro-ecosystem is an agricultural system in an ecology where rainfall is not
significant and agriculture depends largely on irrigation in all seasons.
Rainfed based agro-ecosystems: A rainfed based agro-ecosystem is an ecology having a mean annual
rainfall of > 250mm (in the Middle East) and dominated by rainfed cropping during the rainy season with
potential for supplemental irrigation. The system may have fully irrigated cropping in the non-rainy season
where water resources for irrigation are available.
Marginal rangelands (Badia): The marginal rangelands (Badia) is an agricultural system in an ecology
having rainfall <250 mm (in the Middle East) dominated by rangeland and livestock production systems.
Limited irrigation may be practiced where water resources are available.
The main thrust of this phase was to get the project set up in all countries and approach USAID Missions in
the target countries for support for the bilateral programs where they have a presence. Representatives from
USAID in Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, and Yemen were present at the Inception Meeting at Aleppo, but not
USAID in Baghdad and USAID in Beirut. USAID Baghdad will have benefited from the presence of
colleagues from USDA who did attend.
3
regional and international players. The three workshops8 were the Irrigated Workshop held in
Cairo for Egypt, Iraq and Yemen, the Rainfed Workshop held in Aleppo for Lebanon and
Syria; and the Badia (Rangeland) Workshop held in Amman for Jordan and Palestine. It
should be noted however that the workshops were not restricted to the countries of the
respective agro-ecology. Participants from all of the countries attended all of the workshops,
enhancing cross boundary and cross agro-ecosystem cooperation.
At the 2008 Inception workshop, the regional importance of the WLI was stressed by Dr
Mahmoud Solh, Director General of ICARDA as he detailed the chronic problem of water
scarcity in the Middle East noting the per capita availability of water in the Middle East of
1200 cubic meters as opposed to a world average of 7000 cubic meters and the additional
challenges wrought by climate change and rising food prices. This was echoed and driven
home by Dr Adel El-Beltagy, GFAR Chair at the 2009 Irrigation Workshop who noted that
‘global warming was being superimposed on water scarcity with the consequent threat to
peace and stability’. He also emphasised that the discussions at the 5th World Water Forum in
Istanbul had shown that awareness of the problems was increasing as was a sense of urgency
and the recognition of the need for international cooperation corresponding to what was being
proposed by the WLI.
In each of the agro-ecological workshops respected figures from across key institutions and
ministries expressed their approval, willingness to participate and belief in the pressing need
for the WLI at each workshop. In Aleppo, at the rainfed workshop Dr Saleh Bader, Director
General of SBAR in Iraq stressed the utmost importance of addressing the problems of
rainfed as well as irrigated agriculture in tackling water scarcity and food security in a
country which used to experience flooding as a regular event. Dr Awadis Arslan, Director,
Natural Resource Research of GSCAR in Syria, expressed the hope felt at the opportunity to
work with the international community in the WLI in improving the livelihoods of the rural
poor at a time when Syria was moving from a centralized to free market system and at a time
when the ‘dark clouds’ between Syria and the US had begun to clear away. In Amman, Mr
John Smith-Screen USAID Jordan Mission Director emphasised the dire state of water
scarcity in Jordan and the need to bring to bear ‘international best practice’ to solving the
problem as a matter of real urgency.
ICARDA9 has facilitated organization of the WLI since its inception. Its scientific expertise
and its personal knowledge and unique ability to work hand-in-hand with local institutions as
well as international research organizations, donors and universities make ICARDA uniquely
placed to play this role. Regional relationships are fostered through relevant regional
programs and regional coordinators. Two of these regional programs – the Nile Valley and
Sub-Saharan Africa Program and the West Asia Program – cover six countries participating
in the WLI, while the ICARDA Headquarters works closely with host-country Syria. These
programs enhance complementarities in agricultural research, exchange of technology,
promotion of intra- and inter-country linkages, research coordination and the dissemination of
8
9
Irrigated Workshop Cairo: Egypt, Iraq8 and Yemen: 7-9 April 2009
Rainfed Workshop Aleppo: Iraq, Lebanon and Syria: 5-7 May 2009
Badia (Rangeland) Workshop Amman: Jordan and Palestine: 12-14 May 2009
As well as ICARDA, two more CGIAR Centers, IFPRI and IWMI will play the pivotal role in the WLI of
linking the seven countries to a global overview and experience of water, land, livelihoods and related policy.
4
technology through multi-disciplinary teams consisting of national policy-makers, scientists,
extension workers and farmers.
The benefits of this unique role were emphasised in the three agro-ecosystem workshops
enabling the bringing together of an unprecedented range of participants and a level of
dialogue based on the knowledge and trust gained from the social and professional capital
built up by ICARDA over 32 years in the region. In tandem with regional universities and
the participating US universities, research priorities at the benchmark sites were identified,
cross-cutting issues identified and ranked, the role of the US universities defined, a process of
defining key regional ‘hub’ universities initiated and a network linking these regional
universities and their US counterparts established. This regional proposal for the WLI is built
upon and summarises the inputs and recommendations of the original WLI proposal, the WLI
Inception Workshop and the distinct inputs and recommendations from the agro-ecological
workshops in Cairo, Aleppo and Amman.
1.1
Approach: Building on Key Strengths
Key strengths of the approach of the WLI and the WLI which build on the aggregated
knowledge and experience in the region of the participating institutions are:
- Building on existing relationships
- Knowledge sharing strategy
- The integrated benchmark approach and scaling up
1.1.1
Building on Existing Relationships
ICARDA closely allied with IFPRI and IWMI will play the pivotal role in the WLI of linking
the seven countries to a global overview and experience of water, land, livelihoods and
related policy. The WLI harnesses long-term inter-institutional understanding and working
experience that has been established through – in some cases – decades of effective
partnerships. In terms of subject knowledge, diverse capacity exists across the participating
institutions of the WLI in terms of region-specific projects, research and program
methodologies, applied research and project implementation in watershed management and
the improvement of rural livelihoods. These strengths which were leveraged for all three
agro-ecological workshops included field visits to the agro-ecological benchmark sites and
research sites of the key participating research institutions10 and provide the established and
informed platforms from which to launch the WLI in each country. Table 4 in section 3.5,
illustrates the key NARES and WLI contact point and coordinator in each country.
1.1.2
Knowledge Sharing Strategy
A key part of ensuring the value and enduring relevance of the training and capacity building
component of the WLI will be the creation of a knowledge sharing strategy. The development
of a knowledge sharing strategy in each country will form a key part of the activities under
Output 1. The key components of the strategy are as follows: increasing research relevance
through the creation of participatory research plans, improving collaboration during the
research project through the use of multi-stakeholder fora, enhancing learning in the project
10
Monofia Water Benchmark Site managed by the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation and El
Zankalone Research Station of the Ministry of Water and Irrigation in Egypt, Ghab Valley and Aphamia
sites in Syria, and the Mharib and Al-Majidyah watershed used by the water benchmark project and the
Muaqqar research station of the University of Jordan in Jordan.
5
through M&E approaches which incorporate feedback and extending research delivery
through the use of a broad range of methods and media to disseminate messages11.
1.1.3
The Integrated Benchmark Approach and Scaling Up
The benchmark approach is a key methodological component of the INRM 12 approach used
by the CGIAR Centers in combating the multi-faceted problems of rural poverty. ICARDA
and NARES partners presently implement the INRM approach at benchmark sites and this
experience has been used to inform the WLI. As near as is possible they typify the livelihood
and watershed constraints, cross-cutting issues and required activities that reflect the most
pressing watershed and consequent livelihood issues. The integrated benchmark sites
conform to the criteria that research technologies13 and strategies developed in the benchmark
site can be disseminated through ‘scaling-up,’ where the sustainable and integrated water and
land management strategy developed at the benchmark site will be replicated to other
national sites. The benefits of pilot projects remain limited to the project itself where scalingup does not occur or is unsuccessful. Scaling-up is a vital component of the WLI. The
development of a scaling-up strategy will form an integral part of the inception work plan14
with the scaling-up of project activities dependent on early analyses of the benchmark site to
determine their applicability to a broader recommendation domain.
The water and land management technologies for the three agro-ecologies of the WLI are
well known and are at an advanced stage of research, development and implementation. Dr
Theib Oweis, Director of ICARDA’s Integrated Water and Land Management Program gave
an opening presentation15 at each workshop highlighting this knowledge and detailing the
specific constraints of each agro-ecology and the specific technologies and socio-economic
interventions available or suitable for combating them. This was bolstered by country specific
presentations which further reinforced the agro-ecological issues in a country specific
context. The Inception workshop in 2008 had broadly identified the agro-ecologies and
benchmark sites for the seven participating countries and defined the criteria for selection.
The selection of the benchmark sites was then completed by the time of the agro-ecological
workshops (Table 1) allowing for the discussion of generic issues per agro-ecological
benchmark (Table 2) and the prioritization and definition of issues as listed in Table 3.
11
12
13
14
15
See the WLI in Seven Middle East Countries 2008 Proposal for a fuller exposition of the knowledge sharing
strategy.
See the WLI in Seven Middle East Countries 2008 Proposal for a fuller exposition of the INRM approach.
The water and land management technologies for the three agro-ecologies of the WLI are well known and are
at an advanced stage of research, development and implementation. Dr Theib Oweis Director of ICARDA’s
Integrated Water and Land Management Program gave an opening presentation at each workshop detailing
the specific constraints of each agro-ecology and the specific technologies and socio-economic interventions
available or suitable for combating them.
Please refer to the WLI in Seven Middle East Countries 2008 proposal for a more thorough exposition of the
benchmark approach and the Three Step, Ten Point Plan for Scaling Up.
Cairo: Improving agricultural water management in dry areas; Aleppo: Unlocking the potential of rainfed
systems: Amman: Water harvesting for sustainable agriculture and combating desertification in the Badia.
6
Table 1: Final Benchmark Sites Locations for the Seven Participating Countries
Countries
Egypt
Iraq-I
Yemen
Iraq-R
Lebanon
Syria
Jordan
Palestine
Benchmark Name and
Location
3 sub-sites in the Nile
Delta: (a) Old land site: ElBoheya; (b) Salt affected
Soils Site: South ElHussainia; and (c) New
lands Site: El-Bustan
Abu Ghraib situated west of
Baghdad on the
Mesopotamian plain,
between the Tigris and
Euphrates rivers.
The Abyan Delta in the
Abyan Governorate to the
North of the Gulf of Aden.
Two villages in Ninevah
Province Khuwaytalah
village and Al SadaBa’aweza village in the Tel
Kafe area.
Northern Bekka Valley, El
Qaa, source of the Orontes
or Assi River.
Two sub-sites, the southern
sub site adjacent to the
Syrian Lebanese border, the
Upper Orontes and the Al
Ghab rainfed plain in the
Orontes Basin.
The IFAD benchmark site
at Mharib and Majidya a 60
km2 site east of Queen Ali
airport.
Two sub-sites in the
Eastern Slopes of the West
Bank the Tammun area in
the north-east of the Eastern
Slopes. Covering 88 square
km and south of Hebron in
the south-east of the
Eastern Slopes and
covering approximately 315
square km.
Benchmark Notes
The Egyptians selected three sub-sites which would represent the
full spectrum of issues faced in the irrigated systems in Egypt
which are under the remit of the two main NARES for Egypt the
MALR and MWRI. The maximisation of existing technology for
its translation into improved livelihoods for farmers is essential.
A 272,000 ha site, roughly 110 km long, and 20 – 30 km wide, 35
km distant from the center of Baghdad. It presents an ideal
opportunity to improve agricultural management while
developing a water master plan and monitoring system for the
control of water quality, volume, flow rates and demand.
An arid to sub-tropical area, about 55 km east of Aden and
primarily a spate irrigated site. It benefits from the on-going
activities of El-Kod Research Station, the first agricultural
research station to be established in the Arabian Peninsula.
Decision-support and policy development to counter unauthorised
mining of groundwater and diversion of spate water are critical
for downstream livelihoods.
The villages are located 30 km south west of Mosul city and 10
km to the northeast of Mosul respectively. The initiative can
benefit both from the ACIAR project based in Ninevah province
and from the proximity to Mosul for the development of added
value products for the home market.
The site presents the opportunity to provide independent
extension advice to farmers in a diverse cropping system in the
context of developing community organisations which are
considered vital to the initiative. Optimising supplemental
irrigation is considered a priority. Provision of rural livelihoods
is vital to stem the exodus to urban areas from the region.
Decision-support will be developed to counter the water losses
and improve the efficiency of the water management system and
to reallocate that water. Livelihoods strategies that will aid
farmers and capitalize on the move from a centrally controlled
system to a free market economy will be developed.
The initiative will build on the work done by the IFAD, GEF
projects and from the micro catchment and water harvesting
research of the University of Jordan research station nearby.
Community inclusion and the dissemination of information in
developing livelihood strategies will be critical while tackling the
issue of options for the valuation and preservation of the culture
of the Bedouin and the Badia.
Whilst dealing with the vagaries of climate change and the
availability of water, the initiative will tackle improved livestock
management including the vital issue of fodder production for
maximum sustainable production. Post harvest added value
products and diversified farming options must be carefully
balanced with environmental concerns. Access to the sites is
65%. As in the Jordan Badia, community empowerment is vital
to the success of interventions at the site.
7
1.2. The Benchmark Sites
The agro-ecological workshops allowed for generic discussion of common problems and
constraints according to agro-ecological system in the seven participating countries (Table 2)
as well as specific discussion of issues particular to each country leading to the prioritisation
of three issues for each country, and the ranking of cross-cutting issues in each country
(Table 3). The selection of three priority issues per country was a device to hone the
technical and research interventions in each country and aid in the designation of research
topics for PhD and post doctoral study. The ranked cross cutting issues allowed for focus to
be placed on country specific constraints to achieving the ultimate goal of the WLI, the
improvement of livelihoods, in fora where technical discussions had the potential to envelop
livelihood considerations. They also provided a list for the focus of potential study
particularly relevant in the designation of MSc degrees. It was also seen through the
workshops that there was a good deal of potential for synergy among agro-ecologies across
countries, which could be leveraged for cooperation on areas of technical overlap, capacity
building and cross-cutting issues with countries that are at a more developed or advantageous
stage of research, development and capacity as being able to aid those less so.
Table 2: Areas of Generic Discussion at each Agro-ecological Workshop.
Showing areas of generic discussion for each agro-ecological system
Irrigated
Rainfed
Badia
-- Sustainable irrigation/cropping -- Optimizing
-- Rehabilitation of degraded
systems
supplemental irrigation
rangelands
(SI) including deficit SI
-- Improving cropping pattern
-- Alternative grazing systems
-- Adoption of
-- Management of salt-affected soils conservation
-- Integrating water harvesting
agriculture
-- Treated wastewater and bio-solids
-- Improving livestock
reuse
-- Ground and surface
productivity
water management
-- Protected agriculture for cash crops
-- Alternative crops for
-- Sustainable use of agricultural
higher income
drainage
-- Watershed management
-- Water productivity under flood
irrigation
-- Upstream-downstream
relations
-- Improved fertilizer productivity
-- Cross-cutting issues across all agro-ecological benchmarks:
Communication between stakeholders
Decision-support/ Modelling
Gender*,
Extension
Institutional capacity development
Training
* Gender i.e. equity for women in each activity will be built into the in the WLI. However in some
countries e.g. Yemen for the role of women in irrigation and post-harvest production and processing it
forms a discreet area of intervention.
8
Table 3: Priority Technical and Research Issues and Ranked Cross Cutting Issues for the
Seven Participating Countries
Countries
Priority Technical and Research Issues
Ranked Cross-Cutting Issues
Egypt
1. Irrigation management
1. Community empowerment:
2. Soil management
2. Training and capacity development
3. Cropping systems
3. Decision-support
4. Enabling policy environment
Iraq-I
1. On-farm water management
1. Community empowerment:
2. Saline soil management
2. Training and capacity development
3. Cropping system management
3. Communication between stakeholders
including between countries i.e. Egypt
4. Decision-support
Yemen
1. Surface and ground water
1. Community empowerment
management
2. Policy development for laws surrounding
2. Crop and fodder improvement
water distribution.
3. Salt intrusion and groundwater
3. Extension services in irrigation and crop
salinity management
management
4. Gender: women’s role in post harvest
priorities and irrigation
5. Training (short course and post graduate)
including modelling
Iraq-R
1. Improving water and land
1. Extension
productivity
2. Community Empowerment
2. Improving integration of crop and
3. Training/capacity building
livestock production
4. Gender equality
3. Improving farmers knowledge and
5. Institutional and policy environment
management/organisation capacities
(dealing with transition)
Lebanon
1. Improving water productivity.
2. Optimising supplemental irrigation.
3. Development of farmer organisations.
Syria
1. Improving integrated water and land
management
2. Improving animal-plant production
systems
3. Improving market linkages
Jordan
1. Immediate Income generating options
2. Integrated water harvesting and soil
productivity improvement
3. Alternative grazing and feeding
systems for livestock/crop production
Palestine
1. Land degradation (vegetation, erosion,
runoff)
2. Low animal productivity (flock size
and management, movement,
supplemental feed)
3. Climate variability (drought) and
climate change
4. Social organization (establishment of
community organizations, incl.
women)
9
1. Community/farmer empowerment through
farmer organisations
2. Capacity building and training
3. Improving the effectiveness of extension
1. Rural community and gender
empowerment
2. Policy in relation to economic
restructuring i.e. the move towards a freemarket-economy
3. Capacity building
4. Social/poverty issues
5. Institutional issues
1. Community empowerment
2. Gender/women’s empowerment
3. Communication between stakeholders
4. Training and capacity development
1. Community empowerment (farmer
organizations, including gender)
2. Extension (technology transfer and
adoption)
3. Training and capacity building (esp for
rangeland)
Table 4a: Summary of outputs on both levels across the workshops and the location of their
inclusion in the proposals
Agroecological
workshop
Cairo
Irrigated
Workshop
Egypt
Iraq-Irrigated
Yemen
Country Benchmark
Outputs
Included in bilateral
proposal Section 1.2
-- Generic discussion
in the categories of:
sustainability,
productivity and
socio-economic
issues
-- Priorities and cross
cutting issues
-- Education and
training
WLI Methodology and Approach
Issues discussed and Outputs
Inclusion in
proposals
-- Development of university
matrix
-- Recommendations from US
university panel
-- Recommendations from
regional and national university
panel
-- Development of Regional Hub
University Network
-- Professional societies and post
doctoral links
-- Idea of WLI web portal
- Synergy among agro-ecological
sites across countries
-- Refining how to conduct the
Aleppo and Amman workshops
Table 5
Section 1.3.3, Box
2, Appendix 2
Box 3
Section 1.3.2
Section 1.3.1.3
Section 1.3.1.1
Section 1.2
Not in proposal
but important in
process
Table 4b: Summary of outputs on both levels across the workshops and the location of their
inclusion in the proposals
Agroecological
workshop
Aleppo
Rainfed
Workshop
Iraq-Rainfed
Lebanon
Syria
Country Benchmark
Outputs
Included in bilateral
proposal Section 1.2
-- Brain storming of
general issues and
constraints
-- Priorities and cross
cutting issues
-- Sub-outputs and
activities under
identified priority
issues.
-- Basic stakeholder
analysis
WLI Methodology and Approach
Issues discussed and Outputs
Inclusion in
proposals
-- Refining of University Matrix
-- Basin level activities
-- Access to education e.g. English
language training
-- The importance for security and
efficacy of youth and gender
-- Emphasis on improved
livelihoods as the goal of
technical interventions
-- Emphasis on farmers and their
inclusion as imperative to the
success of the initiative and their
inclusion in the SAG
-- Reorientation of extension
systems
- Further refining of what outputs
needed from following
workshop
Table 5
Output 1
Output 2
10
Output 1,
Section 3.5.1
Throughout WLI
& Output 3
Bilateral
proposals, Section
1.2, Output 1 &
3.5.4.4
Output 1
Not in proposal
but important in
process
Table 4c: Summary of outputs on both levels across the workshops and the location of their
inclusion in the proposals
Agroecological
workshop
Amman
Badia
Workshop
Jordan
Palestine
Country Benchmark
Outputs
Included in bilateral
proposal Section 1.2
-- Definition of
constraints on macro,
meso and micro
levels
-- Problem and
opportunity analysis
-- Detailed stakeholder
analysis
-- Honing of country
specific activities
under new log frame
WLI Methodology and Approach
Issues discussed and Outputs
Inclusion in
proposals
-- Honing of original logframe
from five to three outputs
-- Environmental payment/tax for
upkeep and conservation of
green spaces
-- E-learning group
recommendations:
E-learning
Appendix 1 and
Outputs 1, 2 & 3
Badia bilaterals
Listed below:
WLI portal
Section 1.3.1,
Box 1
Section 1.3.1.1
M&E
Section 3.5.5
Associations review
Table 6
Agricultural policy review
Table 6
Tasks to be completed under the
existing grant
Table 6
1.2.1
Workshop Outputs for the Benchmark sites
The outputs from each agro-ecological workshop for each country, for insertion into the
benchmark work plans and log frames differ, reflecting the iterative process of the
workshops. Two different levels of output are also reflected, those directly linked to the
benchmark sites and those feeding into the methodology and approach of the WLI as a whole.
Tables 4 a, 4b and 4c summarise the outputs on both levels across the workshops and the
location of their inclusion in the proposals.
1.3
Training
Training is the lynch pin of the WLI16. Training that is tailored to and informed by the
specific needs of the farmers, personnel and students connected to the benchmark site, for inservice training, short courses, and graduate training at the MS and PhD levels. The planning
phase has concentrated on a participatory process for the prioritisation of training needs both
at the inception workshop and country specific agro-ecological workshops. A process which
was informed by discussion and support provided by ICARDA, the US universities and the
shared trans-national experiences of the irrigated agro-ecologies of the seven participating
countries. The needs and priorities emanating from the benchmark site form the basis of the
country program and the training required for policy-making, research and extension and will
be used to build the training modules and structure the research for post-graduate degrees in
each country. It has been agreed that 3 PhDs and 5 MSc degrees will be allocated to each
country when bilateral grants are available. The 3 PhDs will be allocated to the priority
technical topics decided by the participating countries while the 5 MSc degrees will be used
to further research into and produce distinct outputs for the identified cross-cutting issues or
specific issues arising from each of the three project outputs. Short courses, for
qualifications, knowledge and skills will be determined by the needs arising from key
stakeholders across all levels of society arising from activities in each output. Opportunities
16
Please refer to the original proposal for a full exposition of training in the WLI.
11
for post-doctoral study and exchange will also be promoted as an important facet of
promoting the sustainability of the project. (see 1.3.1.3). The training needs and priorities as
identified in the 2008 Inception workshop and 2009 agro-ecological workshops are shown
below and in Table 5 and reflect the iterative process of the workshops whereby in the first
workshop (Irrigated) the general parameters of how training in the WLI should be
accomplished were being established by all the participants in their respective country breakout groups:
Box 1: General Training Recommendations from Egypt, Iraq-I and Yemen at the Irrigated
Workshop:
- A strong focus on short courses as the most efficient way of bringing stakeholders together.
- MSc and PhD programs endorsed i.e.: 3 PhDs and 5 MSc’s across priority themes
- Sandwich programs should be promoted having worked well in the past.
- Distance learning should be extended to the WLI.
- In-service training should be included in the WLI, taking account of the partner institutions in the
region with US institutions sending people as instructors and also as participants.
- Post doctoral research to be included incorporating programs such as Fulbright and the Borlaug
Fellows Program
- Community based training
- Specific training for women
- Targeted TA for training in defined areas
- Identification of which models to use
- Enhanced communication between stakeholders as a top priority for research dissemination and
transformation into real benefits for livelihoods.
- Methods of trainings to include; demonstrations, farmer field days, farmer2farmer visits.
- Need for applied research and extension in subjects such as conservation agriculture, irrigation
management and information systems and sharing to bridge the gaps among researchers,
extensionists and farmers.
- Training to target: WUAs and service providers; researchers and engineers, laboratory staff, field
technicians, extension staff as well as farmers.
Table 5a: Training Priorities and Preferences of the Irrigation Benchmark Countries
Countries
Training Priorities and Preferences in the Irrigated Agro-ecological Workshop
17
- GIS/RS to focus on: land cadastre; genomics to breed for salinity and drought tolerance in
Egypt
Iraq-I
Yemen
crops; modelling for water allocation and economic consequences: USU
- Breeding for water efficiency TAMU
- Modelling water associations UF
Specific areas of research or TA were defined as:
- Salinity: monitoring salinity in the irrigated benchmark site for up-scaling to larger areas
using new science and technology inputs: UCD/UCR.
- Water stress
- Farm water saving
- Modelling of water allocation: UIUC
- Decision-support to government
Specific areas of research, short course, capacity building or TA were defined as:
- Water management (e.g. scheduling, spate irrigation system deterioration): USU
- Protected horticulture: UCD
- Salinity
- GIS and RS, Modelling SWP and GW
- Socio-economic analysis
- Laboratories, soil-water-plant analysis
- Mechanisation, agronomy: TAMU
17
The Egyptian, Iraqi and Yemeni break out groups supplied the general recommendations for training listed in
Box 1.
12
Table 5b: Training Priorities and Preferences of the Rainfed Benchmark Countries
- Drought, cold and disease resistance germplasm varieties for low rainfall areas and
Iraq-R
-
Lebanon
Syria
-
-
conservation agriculture: TAMU, USU, ICARDA
Decision-support modelling and drought monitoring capability for water management
policies at the necessary scales. TAMU, UCD/UCR, USU, UIUC, UF, IWMI:
Water valuation, water user associations: USU
Gender studies, market chains, capacity development, redesigning extension services and
policy change: TAMU, UCD/UCR, UF, UIUC, ICARDA
Water resources mapping and modelling and conservation agriculture: TAMU:
Horticulture; post-harvest processing and product quality control: UCD
Alternative crops and extension: UIUC
Horticulture; irrigation; gender-specific extension programs and farmers organisations: UF
Groundwater monitoring, water harvesting; treated waste water and bio-solids re-use: USU
Irrigation, fertility management and sustainable use of agricultural drainage water:
UCD/UCR
Enhancing local institutions and communities through WUA’s and producer groups for HV
commodities and access to markets and information dissemination and extension through
associations: UCD, UIUC, UF
Activities related to impact assessment; market chain development; labelling and certification
of local products for export purposes; and food technology and marketing: TAMU
Table 5a: Training Priorities and Preferences of the Rangeland Benchmark Countries
- Use of mature bio-solids as soil amendments on rangeland: USU
Jordan
-
Palestine
-
-
Improvement of small ruminant breeding, health, nutrition and management: TAMU
Investigation of irrigation in the rangelands using saline water applied to saline soils: USU
HV low water use crops e.g. herbal, medicinal and aromatic plants and low water use. Value
addition, processing and marketing: TAMU, UCD,
Drought monitoring and modelling of watershed hydrological improvements over time
created through implementation of project activities: UIUC
Community empowerment and gender among the Badia population: UF
Forage and shrub plant materials; conservation of genetic resources, rangeland improvement:
TAMU, UCD
Watershed Management: water harvesting structures; training in hydrology, watershed
management: USU
Treated wastewater and bio-solids reuse; integrated water resources and water scarcity
management: USU
Forage production and conservation; value-added processing of dairy, herbs, vegetables:
TAMU, UIUC
Animal health; food science technology: TAMU
Participatory community negotiation on upstream-downstream wadi development; organic
agriculture production, fair trade capacity building and gender empowerment: UF
Medicinal herbs and plants inventory and market chain development: UIUC
Horticultural and agronomic training and plant material evaluation: UCD
13
1.3.1
Delivery: International and Regional Partnerships and E-learning
The emphasis on the training in the WLI is on economy, expediency and efficiency through
the use of e-learning and national, regional and US university partnerships in conjunction
with ICARDA as a main regional training center. Key national universities in each of the
participating countries will link to regional hub universities in the WLI whilst developing
their own regional capacities through the initiative18 (Table 6). Although each country will
have key regional hub universities due to location and agro-ecological expertise, linkages
between the hub universities themselves will mean that countries will have access to their
capability across the region. Key points of the training approach as laid out in the original
proposal include: case study materials made available as part of the expanding e-learning
knowledge base; the making available of accrued knowledge, tools and approaches as public
goods to agricultural research and extension institutions; making available as a priority, the
materials to all levels of personnel at the benchmark who do not speak English and the
furthering of access to women through online materials. The WLI will make the most of the
benefits of the existing distance learning and e-learning capabilities of the US universities19
to compile a comprehensive set of e-learning resources which will include core compulsory
modules and modules focused specifically on the irrigated agro-ecologies. English language
provision was highlighted as an issue at the agro-ecological workshops as were the
mechanisms by which universities would assist potential students to meet admission criteria.
ICARDA will play a pivotal role in tendering out contracts to English language providers in
the region and the universities have highlighted the options and flexibility available in
ensuring that students are able to access the higher education modules and degrees in addition
to the large number of training media already developed in Arabic.
Table 6: Key National and Regional Hub Universities per Country
Countries National Universities
Egypt*
University of: Cairo, Ain Shams, Benha, ZagaZig, AUC
Iraq-I
University of Baghdad
Yemen
University of Aden, University of Sana’a
Iraq-R
University of Mosul, Baghdad University
Lebanon AUB, Lebanese American University
Syria
University of Damascus, University of Aleppo
Jordan
University of Jordan, JUST
Palestine Hebron University, Al-Najah University
Regional Hub University
AUC
AUC
AUC
AUB
AUB
AUB
University of Jordan
University of Jordan
Recommendations from the e-learning breakout group held at the Badia workshop in Amman
to be included in the WLI inception work plan were as follows.
18
19
See 1.3.2 for regional hub universities and regional training
Several of the US universities, if not all, have also already developed a number of materials for short courses
given elsewhere that would be highly relevant to this group. TAMU, USU and UCD have a number of short
courses given in the IAER extension program in which all the materials are in both Arabic and English e.g.
see http://distance.tamu.edu/futureaggies/distance-degrees/master-of-natural-resources-development.html
14
Box 2: Badia Workshop e-learning breakout group recommendations
Participants: Dr Khaled Bali (USA-UCD), Dr Marta Hartmann (USA-UF), Dr Prasanta Kalita (USAUIUC) Dr Fawzi Karajeh (ICARDA), Dr Mac McKee (USA-USU), Dr SteveWhisenant (USA-TAMU), Dr
Mohamed Abu Eid (Palestine-NARC), Dr Khader Atroosh (Yemen-AREA), Ms Rula Bashour (Lebanon,
AUB), Dr Butros Hattar (Jordan-JU-WERSC), Dr Kassem Jouni (Lebanon, AUB, and Dr Mohamed Ismail
(Egypt, ARC).
1. Establish an E-Learning Committee (ELC) with co-leaders from each institution (a leader and
designated backup) from interested institutions under the WLI.
2. Determine terms of reference for the committee or consider use of a consultant to
organize materials needed for consideration by the ELC. Extend the concept of e-learning to
all levels of the project but make sure to also include the community.
3. Survey WLI participants to feed the construction of the WLI e-learning portal.
Activities to include in the survey:
- Determine the most appropriate websites and /or contacts at the organization of interest to
which interested parties could be quickly directed
- Determine software/hardware and bandwidth available at each institution
- Assemble, list and present courses on offer, course frequency and length
- Organize findings on available courses into e-learning categories such as courses leading to a
degree; non-degree; and short-term training
- Assess administrative regulations and costs including the physical presence requirements for
each type of training
- Examine how on-the-job training or in-service, e-learning or traditional educational programs
could accumulate credit at regional universities to earn a degree
- Determine the full capabilities of e-communication for e-learning purposes e.g. conference
calls, video teleconferences access to software products on-line, on-line training in subjects
such as English language training20
- A meeting of the WLI ELC could be convened at a regional hub university to operationalize
some initial steps under the existing phase of the WLI
1.3.1.1
Needs and Resource Matching: The WLI Portal
As part of the honing and identification of short-term training and post graduate needs for the
benchmark sites, a parallel exercise of resource identification will take place where existing
capabilities, material and infrastructure with direct relevance to the WLI are complied across
all the participating universities and research institutions21. These can then be matched to the
training needs as identified through the inception activities of the WLI. Another facet of
these activities will be the identification of areas where material must be adapted or new
material created for the WLI. An assessment of the e-learning infrastructure of the key
20
Applications such as Skype or Adobe Connect can be used for conference calls and can include video for the
latter. UCD allows faculty access to over 400 software products that teach a variety of topics such as how to
use MS Office, Technical Writing, Project Management, Conflict Management, Consensus Building,
Leadership Training, and Facilitation. These opportunities with UCD or other universities could be made
available under the WLI.
21
This includes the use or adaptation of specific modules already in existence and piecing together, comparing
and exchanging course materials and content based on specific needs for active learning methods such as the
MUCIA sub-project managed by UIUC in Egypt under the Agricultural Exports and Rural Income (AERI)
Project of USAID. Two key objectives were to strengthen the skills of Egyptian agricultural graduates by
linking educational systems with private sector workforce needs and to increase the responsiveness of
university and research institutions to the research needs of agriculture and agribusiness.
15
national, regional hub universities and ICARDA will also be undertaken to ensure their
capacity to accommodate e-learning. A WLI website22 will provide the portal23 for efficient
communication, information exchange, needs identification and resource matching between
national, regional and international institutions. Curricula can be shared and compiled and
material immediately matched or adapted to form the core modules for training the staff that
will participate in the WLI activities at benchmark sites.
The portal will also provide the venue for the dissemination of data published as outputs from
the WLI in accordance with the knowledge sharing philosophy on which the WLI is based
and will be a powerful tool for use in the monitoring and evaluation system. To maintain the
value of the data sharing component, data will be collected24, sorted and divided into data
which are available for public access and those which are restricted to designated user areas
of the portal. The PMU (see 3.5.4) at ICARDA will be responsible for development of the
WLI web portal, knowledge sharing and monitoring and evaluation (see 3.5.5).
1.3.1.2
Post Graduate Degrees and Short Courses
The post graduate element of the WLI offers the creation of long-term institutional capacity
with tailored research to solve specific prioritised problems at the benchmark site. It was
agreed at the Irrigated Workshop that the sandwich program offered the optimum model for
the MS and PhD training, with a history of success, access to prestigious international
teaching and research opportunities, but with relevant focus of study at the benchmark site.
Logistically, the US university accredited sandwich program is the easiest to implement25,
however the potential to take some core modules at regional hub universities and creating
links between National and Regional Universities and US universities will be explored. The
direct link between post-graduate research and the benchmark site offers research
opportunities that could be tackled by MS or PhD students or post-docs and would be of
direct benefit to the benchmark site. An example research area would be post-harvest
technology and the marketing of products from groups or associations.
It was unanimously endorsed by all educational institutions at the Irrigation Workshop that
the short course would play a pivotal role in the WLI and offered the most flexibility in terms
of the type of capacity building and training required in the WLI. It was agreed that short
courses would be key for the short-term/in-service training of regional and national faculty
and regional capacity building, that they offer an optimum method of bringing different
stakeholders together in an intensive teaching environment that enables learning about
specific topics and that they offer the opportunity to form important links between university
students and farmer training. The short courses also present the key area in which both
existing materials may be utilized and new tailor-made material can be optimized.
22
23
24
25
This can be developed as a dynamic website i.e. a smart portal which combines specific content management
solutions and optional extensions including; private user areas, site linking and multi-site management.
Short bios and capability statements of each participating institution are being collected and will be put on
the WLI website in the coming months which will make it possible to find out about each
institution's specific interest in the WLI and general interests by linking to each institution's website.
This will include submission of quarterly reports to assure data collection and data analyses as well as annual
coordination and planning meetings to exchange data, ideas and plan the relevant portion of the budget.
Concerns were expressed at the Irrigated Workshop by US university representatives that tailored WLI PhD
or MSc degrees administered by regional universities but created in tandem with the US universities (as
outlined in the original proposal) would prove very difficult logistically due to rules surrounding
accreditation and the scope of the capacity building that would be required.
16
1.3.1.3
Professional Societies and Post-Doctoral Opportunities
The suggestion of involving professional societies in order to promote the WLI, the regional
hub universities and to engage experts in the participating countries was endorsed at the
Irrigated Workshop. The American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America,
Soil Science of America, International Agribusiness Management Association and
International Society for Horticulture Science were all noted as potential professional
societies. On-going initiatives with these societies include trying to increase representation
from professionals in Africa and the Middle East, including drastically reduced membership
fees for national scientists and exploration of virtual joint annual meetings, all of which will
tie in naturally with the aims of the WLI. A recommendation arising from the Badia
workshop was the inclusion of one-year post-doctoral students coming from or going to the
US to do carry out research at the benchmark site and for similar programs of a shorter
duration for professors. Programs such as the Fulbright Fellows program and SIDA
Programme in Trans-boundary Water Management will be exploited by the WLI for this
purpose26. Throughout the series of three workshops the question of how to guarantee the
sustainability of the project activities, community involvement and linkages between US
universities and the region’s universities and institutes beyond the lifetime of the project was
considered. The involvement of professional societies and generation of two-way postdoctoral opportunities were found to be strategies which could be used to establish and
bolster strong linkages to institutionalize and mainstream project activities in each country.
1.3.2
Regional Hub Universities27 and Regional Training
A main facet of the training component will be the dependence for training on regional hub
universities. These universities are distinguished by excellent facilities, long-standing
expertise and capacity. They will play a leading role in connecting with other regional hub
universities in the other countries of the WLI, linking national universities and key personnel
within them to the training opportunities of the WLI and coordinating with the participating
US universities. They will serve as distance learning centers and help coordinate the national
training needs by linking with the NARES and the needs emanating from the irrigated
benchmark sites. These links to the benchmark site will be reinforced through the
participation of the regional hub university as a member of the National Technical Committee
(NTC) and stakeholder in the Site Advisory Group (SAG). At the Irrigated Workshop in
Cairo the ‘Network of Regional Hub Universities’ was established, which has initiated the
process of defining which universities to include in the network and further defining key
priorities and key strengths for participating national universities as a start point to matching
up with appropriate partners. At the Irrigated Workshop the AUC volunteered to chair the
Network. The AUC and other regional hub universities have excellent facilities, regional
expertise and existing linkages to US universities and projects in the region that can be
leveraged for the WLI. Box 3 details the recommendations given by a panel of Regional Hub
University representatives at the Irrigated Workshop on the best entry for cooperation and
areas for training in the WLI, which will be built into the training approach.
Box 3: Key regional hub university representatives and aggregated recommendations: See
26
27
Other examples of training and exchange opportunities would be the ‘Bridging Workshop Series’ to be held
at ICARDA addressing the sustainable and productive use of saline water in agriculture see the website at
http://www.icarda.org/Announcement/2009/Int_Workshop_on_Saline_Water/Int_Workshop_on_Saline_Wat
er_2009.htm. See http://fulbright.state.gov, http://www.cies.org for the links to the Fullbright scholarships.
See Table 6
17
comments below for each person 1-7:
1. Dr Nasri Haddad (UJ); 2. Dr Musa Neimeh (AUB); 3. Dr Tina Jaskolski (AUC); 4. Dr Atef Swelam (UZ);
5. Dr Nabil Al-Awadi (AS); 6. Dr Mohamed El-Ansary (BU); and 7. Dr Abd El Amin (CU)
1. Very good scope for cooperation; including joint supervision of training.
2. A transitional stage in regional capacity building, part in the US, part in the region.
3. The regional universities can play an important role in bridging the language barrier between
educationalists and farmers.
4. The regional universities have strong programs for the hands-on training of farmers.
5. Sandwich programs for graduate training were endorsed.
6. Short courses for institutional capacity building and farmer and benchmark stakeholder training were
seen as very important. Regional awards for outstanding research could also be promoted.
7. The regional universities see possibilities for: research linkages, logistical support including equipment
and online and distance learning.
1.3.3 US Universities: A Consortium Approach and Comparative Advantages
Research links were prioritised at the three agro-ecological workshops and a matrix
developed (see Table 7), illustrating the extensive coverage offered by the participating US
universities of the identified priority topics in the seven participating countries. A consortium
approach where the pooled expertise will be leveraged according to availability and site
specific suitability will enable the exploitation of this expertise and ensure uninterrupted
input from the US universities to address the needs arising from the benchmark site. The
comparative advantages of the participating universities have been identified (see Appendix
3, Table 11) and these will be taken into account when formulating responses to the research
and training needs arising from the benchmark sites. Priority will be given to the universities
whose comparative advantage best matches the specific needs arising. Box 4 details the
recommendations given by a panel of US university representatives at the Irrigated Workshop
on the best entry points and approaches for training in the WLI and which will be built into
the training approach.
Box 4: Key US university representatives and recommendations: See comments below for
each person 1-5 (in the order of presentation):
1. Wyn Walker (USU); 2. Bill Payne (TAMU); 3. John Letey (UCR); Jim Oster( UCR); 4. Jim Hill (UCD);
and 5. Rao Mylavarapu (UF)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
WLI to develop a model of how US universities can link in to the region
- TA to be provided on a case-by-case basis
- The partnerships with regional universities to be strengthened in techniques such as distance learning
and to develop methods to best transmit that information to students and in-service personnel
The similarity of water and land problems of many SW US universities with the region ensures the
relevancy of the partnerships.
- Sandwich program for post-graduate training
- Short-term training for intensive skills boost
- Working with FAs and women for empowerment, connection with value chains
Comparison of different models to test their veracity.
- Individuals with expertise for short-term training and TA
- Challenge to bring together small plots to make technology cost effective
Working as a team of different universities as in the current project IAER project in Iraq and using the
consortium approach.
- Short-term training using the regional hub universities and ICARDA and US personnel coming to the
region to enhance training where required.
- The use of comparative advantages when assigning universities.
- Extension must be emphasized for the project to have impact with the building of trust between
farmers and extensionists.
Strong parity of WLI with existing participatory and distance learning based on-going initiatives
including the development of infrastructure including laboratories.
18
Table 7: University Topic Matrix for the seven participating countries.
Codes: UC-(D)avis, U(F)lorida, U(I)llinois-UC, UC-(R)iverside, (T)exas AMU, and (U)tah SU.
Topics
Seven participating countries
Irrigation
D, F*,R,T,U, *Florida would not cover
irrigation in Yemen
D,F,T,
D,F,R,T,U
D,R,T,U
D,T,U
D,F,R,T
D,F,R,T
F,D,T
D,T
D,T,U
D,T
I,D,R,T
D,F,T,U
D,F,I,R,T,U
D,F,R
T
F,T,U
D,T,U
D,F,R,U
D,F,I,T,U
D,F,T,U
D,F,I,R,T,U
D,F,I,R,T,U
D,F,T,U
D,F,I,R,T,U
D,F,I,T
D,F,I,T
F,I
D,F,I,T
Agronomy
Soil
Salinity
Waste Water
Marginal Water
Horticulture
Forestry
Livestock
Rangeland
Genetics
IPM
GIS/RS
Modelling including climate change
Environmental Impact Assessment
Machinery, Equipment & Alternative Energy
Institutional Capacity Development
Policy Development
Social Economic Issues and Gender
Degree Training
Short Courses
Farmer Training
Distance Learning
Language training and computer skills
Extension
Community Development inc FAs/FIGs
Food technology, Processing
Food safety and hygiene
Value Chain & Market Dev
19
2.
Strategic Objective Linkages
‘Peace, stability, and economic growth in the Near East region is a high national security
priority of the United States’. (FY 2009 International Affairs Congressional Budget
Justification). Water scarcity is the key constraint to the improvement of rural livelihoods
that are mainly dependent on land productivity and is the fundamental issue threatening
economic development, food security and stability in many parts of the region. In addressing
the fundamental issues of water scarcity and improving rural livelihoods the WLI will
significantly contribute to the amelioration of the destabilising effects of these issues.
In the 2008 WLI Inception workshop Dr John O. Wilson, Environmental Officer for both the
Asia Bureau and the Middle East Bureau, and Deputy Director, Office of Technical Support
in USAID, Washington, DC underlined the USAID strategy for work on water in the regions
and detailed the cross-cutting processes of which it is comprised. Below are listed those in
direct alignment with the strategy and outputs of the WLI:
-
-
3.
Work through regional processes/institutions for cooperative management of shared
water in key regions
Support to governments to strengthen policies and regulations to use water more
efficiently
Protection of quality of water resources
Promotion of stakeholder participation and accountable water governance
Building of partnerships among communities, governmental agencies, and the private
sector
Engaging regional water entities, cooperating governments, local communities
donors, foundations, and private companies to address the water challenges in the
Middle East region
Identifying and training the next generation of water decision-makers
Program Description
The goal of WLI is to improve the livelihoods of households and communities in the
benchmark sites of the seven participating countries by increasing economic, social and
educational opportunities through addressing the key priority issues identified in each
country.
3.1
Specific Objectives
The main objective is to develop and pilot test an integrated water, land-use and livelihoods
strategy in the benchmark sites for scaling up, which will optimize new and existing incomegenerating crop and livestock activities.
This objective will be achieved by outputs in policy and implementation, training, and
sustainable livelihoods as follows:
1. Integrated water and land-use strategies for policy-making, tools for sustainable
benchmark management and organizational mechanisms for community inclusion at the
benchmark sites.
2. Enhanced knowledge, skills and qualifications for key stakeholders in the benchmark sites.
20
3. Improved rural livelihoods of farmers in the benchmark sites through the adoption of
sustainable land and water management practices and livelihood strategies.
3.2
Geographic Focus
The geographic focus of the WLI, are the benchmark sites selected by each of the seven
participating countries. Please see Table 1 for an overview of the locations and the bilateral
proposals for specific descriptions. Although the initial focus of the WLI will be the
benchmark site, built into the benchmark approach is the process of scaling up for the
replicable transfer of successful techniques and outputs at a national level.
3.3
Components
1. Policy and Implementation:
The three technical priority areas in which policy, training and livelihoods will focus have
been selected and cross-cutting issues identified and ranked (see Table 1). These form the
focus of the initiative in the benchmark site. Output 1 and the creation of organizational
mechanisms for implementation reflects the importance of ensuring that policy, strategy and
management at the benchmark is a process which includes stakeholders at all levels of the
benchmark. The inclusion of the community stakeholders in decision-making and planning
for the initiative is considered germane to the relevancy and success of the project and
famer/producer/relevant community representatives will be included in the Stakeholder
Advisory Group. The inclusion of youth throughout the WLI and ensuring their involvement
in project activities and in knowledge dissemination was emphasised as a priority at the WLI
workshops particularly in those countries of the WLI were the disenfranchisement of youth in
the benchmark sites with limited or non-existent livelihood opportunities is a directly linked
to security. In addition the environment for the promotion of group formation and
development will be optimized under this output to ensure that replication is avoided and
constraints are reduced. Activities will include compiling a register of existing groups,
ensuring that the local authorities are favourable towards the creation of groups, coordination
of activities between groups and interested parties and becoming conversant with the legal
framework surrounding groups in the seven participating countries.
Output 1 also reflects the need, arising from current international concerns28, for the
development of a working model to serve as an institutional mechanism which can address
problems highlighted by the recent food crisis. The model proposed by the WLI and the WLI
is of partnerships among developing and developed country universities, research agencies,
farmer’s organizations and where possible firms to form smaller scale partnerships adapted to
specific agricultural production regimes. Cross-cutting issues29 and synergies between
countries will be included in the development of this model. The National Technical
28
29
In his speech Revitalization of Research for Agricultural Development in the Middle East delivered at the
Aleppo Rainfed Workshop 7-9 May 2009, Edwin Price, Director of the Borlaug Institute, listed these
concerns were intensified by the World Food Crisis and led to focus on the possible models for the 21 st
century to address the situation. Underlying factors which led to the crisis include lagging technology, land
taken out of production, rising incomes, population rising and fuel costs tending upwards. The factors which
ignited the crisis in 2006-7 were accelerated bio-fuel production, bad weather, conflict in food growing
regions, food stocks falling and speculative demand.
Such as the trans-boundary efforts within the Orontes River Basin Lebanon/Syria: and thematic
commonalities in data collection, modelling, site selection and characterization for Jordan/Palestine.
21
Committee in each country will be responsible for the development of further areas of
synergy and cooperation.
The reorientation and capacity development of the extension system in the benchmark sites
will form an important part of the policy recommendations to be carried out under this
Output. This will include facilitation of the shift from predominantly top-down and
technology driven systems orientated towards national food security, to market-driven
participatory systems that can cope with the demand arising from urban markets for highervalue crop and livestock products and accomplishing this shift to the benefit of those
dependant on rural livelihoods30.
The creation of tools for policy and management will include the development of the WLI
portal, the hiring of key staff for the project management unit in ICARDA, the establishment
of the WLI monitoring and evaluation system and the development of decision-support
models to answer the specific needs identified in each participating country31.
At the Badia Workshop, the cross-cutting breakout group identified that integrated watershed
management decision support tools can be considered cross-cutting and be used for scenario
testing where the designated use of the model is the same in two or more countries. A
comparison of existing models has been recommended under the existing WLI grant as an
essential prerequisite. The model approach of Dr Ximing Cai (UIUC) (see original WLI
Proposal) should be as the baseline with which to compare other options such as Soil-WaterAtmosphere-Plant (SWAP), Agricultural Nonpoint Source Model (AGNPS), and Erosion
Productivity Impact Calculator (EPIC) used by the US Department of Agriculture Natural
Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). Other modelling recommendations
included making distinctions between baseline data and data specific for modelling, using
local university students to improve and adapt models to each country and carefully assessing
the risks of getting too involved with model development or adaptation based on how quickly
the model may be institutionalized for decision-support and scenario testing.
Output 1 Integrated water and land-use strategies for policy-making, tools for sustainable
benchmark management and organizational mechanisms for community inclusion
at the benchmark site.
Output 1.1 Feasible and sustainable policy recommendations for the benchmark site
developed.
1.1.1 Develop and implement a strategic policy plan for the benchmark sites.
1.1.2 Policy analysis and support provided to key institutions in the seven participating
countries by ICARDA, IWMI and US universities.
1.1.3 Validated policy recommendations extended to national and provincial governments
regarding integration including the recommended technologies and management
practices disseminated at farm, community and watershed level.
Output 1.2 Enhanced extension system for the dissemination of sustainable water and land
use practices and livelihood strategies.
30
Burt Swanson (UIUC) provides a full exposition of the techniques and methodologies for accomplishing this
reorientation and capacity development in Chapter 4 ‘Transforming and Strengthening Agricultural
Extension Systems: Options and Priorities’ in a forthcoming book for the World Bank (2009).
31
See bilateral proposals Output 1 for details.
22
1.2.1 Develop working partnerships for improved institutional collaboration between key
NARES, CGIAR Centers, regional and national universities and US universities.
1.2.2 Strengthen key selected NARES and create links between national and provincial
agricultural research and extension organizations, extension workers and farmers for
enhanced and targeted information dissemination.
1.2.3 Facilitate reorientation of existing national extension systems to decentralized,
participatory and market-driven extension approach.
Output 1.3 Development of tools and structures for the effective implementation of the WLI
1.3.1 Development of WLI web portal for knowledge sharing and training.
1.3.2 Hiring of key staff for the project management unit in ICARDA, the Project Manager
and WLI Training Coordinator.
1.3.3 Initiate knowledge sharing plan.
1.3.4 Develop monitoring and evaluation system.
1.3.5 Develop scaling-up plan for the benchmark sites in each participating country.
Output 1.4 Integrated watershed decision-support models developed according to specific
identified priorities in each participating country.
1.4.1 Model assessment, verification and selection.
1.4.2 Baseline study for model selection and M&E
1.4.3 Baseline analysis including uncertainty and risk analysis
1.4.4 Benchmark development including study findings
1.4.5 Develop and test model with relevant stakeholders
1.4.6 Test decision-support capability of model
1.4.7 Conduct analysis of relevant policies
1.4.8 Identify feasible changes to existing policies and strategies.
Output 1.5 Creation of enabling environment aSAG for stakeholder participation and
inclusion in strategy and development at the benchmark site.
1.5.1 Carry out stakeholder analysis of the benchmark site identifying key partners at all
levels for inclusion in the SAG.
1.5.2 Formation of the SAG.
1.5.3 Establish the position and role of the SAG within the WLI implementation structure
and facilitate two way flows of information and strategic decision-making.
1.5.4 Publicize the goal and aims of the WLI to community stakeholders and initiate
coordination with the NARES and regional government to ensure an enabling
environment for the development of community organizations, FIGs, FAs, SHGs and
producer groups.
2. Capacity Building, Research and Knowledge Sharing
The capacity building and training output of the WLI is targeted at key stakeholders in the
benchmark site. The identification of the key stakeholders in the benchmark sites began in
the agro-ecological workshops. A more detailed analysis will be undertaken as an inception
activity under Output 3 and information from this activity will serve as a guide for the
targeting of training for short course and skills training32. The training component of the WLI
will take place at all levels of the benchmark from farmer training and in-service training,
train-the-trainer courses and short courses to post-graduate training and the development of
post-doctoral opportunities. It also includes training to provide the tools to enable the
32
As opposed to the post-graduate course which will be simpler to allocate.
23
appropriation of the relevant skills and knowledge to be offered under the initiative. These
include English language skills, computer and study skills for potential post-graduates, as
well as tools to enable the application of research outputs for the benefit of the community
such as SWOT and PRA for the benchmark technical teams 33 who will undertake the initial
SREP, baseline studies and extension at the benchmark site. Short courses will provide a
flexible and powerful means with which to fill specific knowledge gaps and boost the
capacity of a wide spectrum of stakeholders. Post-graduate education will provide the human
capital to begin to fulfil the national need for the next generation of trained natural research
scientists armed with tailored research outputs from the benchmark site.
The needs and resource matching exercise to be carried out at the initiation of the work plan
will ensure a thorough audit of strengths and resources available from all training
stakeholders for matching against specified needs. This will include inventories of available
materials and will form the basis of an assessment for what adaptation or creation of new
training materials, resources and infrastructure is necessary to fulfil the training component of
the WLI. The WLI portal will provide the main tool, along with the WLI Training
Coordinator, through which this exercise is carried out. A knowledge sharing plan is
considered germane to the training component and includes the induction and participation of
relevant training stakeholders to international non-WLI affiliated fora34 for the dissemination
of their aggregated knowledge and their exposure to standards and knowledge at an
international level.
Output 2 Enhanced knowledge, skills and qualifications for key stakeholders in the
benchmark sites.
Output 2.1 Agreed training and e-learning plan for the benchmark site.
2.1.1 Establish the e-learning committee and develop the e-learning strategy.
2.1.2 Carry out the needs and resource matching exercise through the WLI portal and with
the WLI Training Coordinator.
2.1.3 Develop benchmark training plan including the allocation of postgraduate degrees and
priority stakeholders for short course and train the trainer input.
2.1.4 Conduct training needs assessment and develop curricula for key stakeholders at the
community level.
2.1.5 Tender out English language, computer and study skills and the development or
adaptation of any new e-learning materials to regional institutions, universities and
US universities.
2.1.6 Develop the infrastructure and capacity of national universities, regional universities
and ICARDA to accommodate the e-learning.
2.1.7 Enrol and commence relevant post-graduate degree programs for NARES staff,
managers and other relevant stakeholders.
Output 2.2 Trained benchmark technical teams.
2.2.1 Identify key members of the benchmark technical teams and conduct training needs
assessment.
33
34
The benchmark technical teams will be selected by and under the control of the National Technical
Committee at the benchmark site. See the original proposal for more details.
These fora need not be far flung but the most made of opportunities in the region e.g. The World Water
Forum held in Istanbul this year. (2009)
24
2.2.1 Carry out train-the-trainer courses in PRA, SWOT other relevant participatory
techniques and extension.
Output 2.3 Dissemination of aggregated knowledge and public goods to a broader group of
stakeholders at the benchmark sites, nationally and regionally between participating
WLI countries.
2.3.1 Develop knowledge sharing plan.
2.3.2 Develop, aggregate and adapt, training and research outputs; materials, research
papers, case studies and reviews for publication and sharing on the WLI portal, other
websites and in printed media.
2.3.3 Hold regional and national conferences, workshops and knowledge sharing fora to
benefit all trained stakeholders, strengthen implementation, inculcate participants to
international standards and ensure the dissemination of knowledge and skills as public
goods.
2.3.4 Enrol relevant stakeholders in non-WLI affiliated international conferences and
workshops held in the region and internationally for induction to a wider perspective,
current international research and extension methods and standards and dissemination
of WLI outputs to a wider audience.
3. Improving Rural livelihoods
This Output allies the adoption of research outputs at the benchmark site with the
development of market orientated livelihood strategies for income generation, in the context
of sustainable water and land management practices. The selection of distinct agro-ecological
benchmark sites will enable the immediate exploitation of existing research, technologies and
techniques in water and land management strategies as well as livelihoods both in the
selected benchmarks and from identical agro-ecological sites in the region. Similarly the
implementing and organizational structures and tools developed under Output 1 will bear
fruit in Output 3 for the formation or ongoing facilitation of WUAs, FIGs, FAs and producer
groups through which the water and land management and improved livelihoods strategies
will take place. Other activities undertaken under Output 1 will ensure the pertinence and
efficacy of activities to be undertaken in this Output. Valid and informative indicators for the
data collection and M&E plan will have been selected which will ensure that empirical
documentation and measurement of improvements to livelihoods at the benchmark site can be
carried out. The training plan and capacity development to be undertaken in Output 2 will
ensure that key stakeholders are provided with the knowledge, skills and, where necessary,
qualifications to enable the transferral of the benefits accrued through research to practical
application at the farmer level.
Strategies will be developed and implemented in conjunction with key community
stakeholders. The re-orientated extension system of Output 1 will be the means through
which knowledge and skills will be extended and disseminated among farmers. FIGs, FAs
and producers groups and the aggregation of resources are the vehicle through which farm
income will be increased and ecosystem sustainability improved. With regard to gender,
concerns that a markedly targeted gender approach can result in negative impacts and a
backlash against women, have been taken into account in the WLI resulting in an approach
that acknowledges that many of the best results in the empowerment of women have been
25
achieved where gender is subsumed in livelihoods activities undertaken in the sphere of
women’s activities such as small ruminant production, poultry and post-harvest processing35.
Output 3 Improved rural livelihoods of farmers in the benchmark sites through the
adoption of sustainable land and water management practices and livelihood
strategies.
Output 3.1 Sustainable locally appropriate water and land use technologies identified and
tested for development and dissemination.
3.1.1 Introduce identified and tested water-use management technologies for immediate
dissemination and use by farmers.
3.1.2 Develop a scaling up strategy for the benchmark sites.
3.1.3 Ensure dissemination of methods alongside crop /livelihood technologies for income
generation to encourage adoption.
3.1.4 Increase the capacity of local communities to manage water resource allocation and
use through the formulation of WUAs.
3.1.5 Empirically document that water and land use strategies in the benchmark sites have
been improved.
Output 3.2 Livelihood study and stakeholder analysis undertaken and Strategic Research and
Extension Plan developed for the benchmark sites.
3.2.1 Conduct livelihood study and stakeholder analysis.
3.2.2 Develop SREP for the benchmark sites.
3.2.3 Identify constraints to implementing identified improved crop/livestock technologies
and market development.
Output 3.3 Implementation of improved livelihood strategies.
3.3.1 Test, refine adapt and disseminate water efficient crop/livestock strategies to farm
households through on-farm trials and demonstrations.
3.3.2 Organize farmers and farm women interested in producing and marketing water
efficient crops/products into FIGs , SHGs or producer groups.
3.3.3 Conduct exposure visits for FIGs, FAs and SHGs.
3.3.4 Facilitate contracts and agreements between FIGs and buyers.
3.3.5 Conduct targeted training for producer groups.
3.3.6 Facilitate inputs at the inception stage.
3.3.7 Produce crops or products to specification.
3.3.8 Harvest, handle and deliver crop/product.
3.3.9 Empirically document that rural livelihoods in the benchmark site have been
improved.
35
Burt Swanson and colleagues from the UIUC in a debate over gender approaches following the series of
three agro-ecological workshops gave many examples of backlashes against overt gender interventions. The
optimum approach was agreed to be that which subsumes gender into empowerment through incomegenerating activities undertaken in traditional female spheres.
26
3.4
Expected Results
The initiative is expected to achieve the following results:
1. Policy-making strategies for water and land use, tools for sustainable
management and organizational mechanisms for community inclusion at the
benchmark site.
2. Trained key stakeholders at the benchmark site including 3 PhDs and 5 MSc
degree recipients and short courses for short-term qualifications and key skills
and knowledge across all levels at the benchmark site.
3. Technologies for sustainable water and land use appropriate to the benchmark site
adopted and replicated by project participants including members of WUAs.
4. Improved livelihood strategies leading to income generation for value-added and
higher-value livestock/crops adopted and dissemination by members of FIGs,
FAs and producer groups.
5. The pilot strategy developed at benchmark site is available for scaling up.
3.5
Additional Considerations
3.5.1
Gender
Gender in the WLI will be mainstreamed and the gender disparities that prevail in the seven
participating countries and the subsequent gender considerations that arise from them will be
taken into account when planning and carrying out all program interventions. The need for
discreet interventions for women to achieve desired outcomes and to reflect the reality of the
situation on the ground is also recognized. For example the specific emphasis placed on the
training of women in irrigation techniques and post-harvest production and processing in the
Yemeni proposal, reflects the importance of the role of women in agricultural production and
the difficulties inherent in their gaining access to knowledge and education. A gendered
perspective will be maintained for the WLI, constraints will be identified in research and data
collection and activities implemented using gender disaggregated data. There will also be
emphasis on the recognition of specific male and female knowledge, perspectives and
techniques. The importance of understanding the role of women in the socio-economic
context is understood to be a main factor that will affect the outcomes of the project. The
WLI will build upon work already done with women stakeholder groups formed in the
benchmark sites.
3.5.2
Environmental
Emphasis was placed in the three agro-ecological workshops on the need to embed the
message and precepts of environmental sustainability in all research, education and extension
in the benchmark site. The technologies which have been developed in existing benchmark
sites are inherently sustainable, aimed at both the alleviation of livelihood constraints related
to water and land use for farmers and the long-term need to preserve resources for present
and future generations. Environmental sustainability is taken also to include the impacts on
health for the rural population and includes the coverage of food hygiene and safety and safe
use of pesticides
27
3.5.3
Coordination with other USAID and Non USAID projects
Many ongoing projects have specific relevance to the eight WLI benchmark sites and will
serve as focal points for coordination, which is particularly important in an initiative which
seeks to utilize and build on what has gone before. The specific projects for each benchmark
site can be found in section 3.5.3 in the bilateral proposals. Existing community stakeholder
groups created under the auspices of previous projects in the benchmark sites will be
contacted for inclusion in the WLI to utilize their existing capacity, help in disseminating
information about the initiative and help with inputs if required.
3.5.4
Program Management and Implementation: WLI
3.5.4.1
Legal and Fiduciary Responsibility
The WLI will be convened by ICARDA and the legal and fiduciary responsibility for WLI
will rest with ICARDA’s Board of Trustees (BOT). The three CGIAR Centers, ICARDA,
IWMI and IFPRI, will develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to cover the legal,
financial and hosting policies, authorities and responsibilities for WLI, to ensure a consistent
approach over the duration of the Initiative. The MOU will be signed by all three Directors
General as soon as practicable after the program is approved. Subsequent modifications, if
any, will need to be approved by the same authorities. ICARDA will call for partners to
nominate members to serve on the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and one of their first
orders of business will be to form a Selection Committee for the Project Manager (PM) who
will head the Project Management Unit (see 4.1.5). The PM will then report to the ICARDA
Deputy Director General for Research (DDG-R) for all matters related to research and the
Assistant DG for International Cooperation and Communication (ADG-ICC) for all issues
related to operations, international cooperation and communications. Annual performance
reviews of the PM would be the responsibility of the ADG-ICC.
3.5.4.2
The Project Steering Committee (PSC)
It is suggested that the Project Steering Committee (PSC) will report at least once per year to
the Program Committee of the ICARDA Board. Membership of the PSC will include the
following:





PM (1)
National Coordinators (7)
IWMI (1)
IFPRI (1)
US universities (5)
The PSC will meet at least once per year at which time it will report also to the ICARDA
Board through the Program Committee of the Board. These meetings will be augmented with
teleconferences, email, and other electronic modes of communication, to reduce costs. The
PMU will organize these consultations. Country-based National Coordinators (NC) will liaise
with the ICARDA Regional Coordinator associated with the country and their respective
National Technical Committee (NTC) that will include membership of one member of each
participating organization plus a representative of the SAG that serves as a forum for the
communities and their partners at the site. NCs will ensure that stakeholders’ views are
relayed back to the NTC and PM for consolidation and sharing with the remaining members
of the PSC.
28
3.5.4.3
ICARDA Management Committee (MC)
A subcommittee of the ICARDA Management Committee will serve as the interim project
management as the project gets established. It is composed of key technical specialists who
will at project inception initiate annual work plans and develop functional links with country
counterparts. The members are listed below:









Director, Integrated Water and Land Management Program Project Leader WLI at
ICARDA
Director, Socio-Economic and Policy Research Program
Director, Biodiversity and Integrated Gene Management Program
Director, Diversification and Sustainable Intensification of Production Systems
Head - Geographic Information Systems Unit
Head - Computing and Biometric Services Unit
Head - Communications and Documentation Services Unit
Head - Capacity Development Unit
Head - Project Development and Grants Management Unit
3.5.4.4
National Coordinator (NC), Site Advisory Group (SAG), and National
Tech Committee (NTC)
The NARES counterpart institutions that attended the inception workshop from the seven
participating countries will assume the leadership of the WLI at the outset. They will
facilitate the formation of the NTC and SAG at the benchmark site and make sure there is
good communication with policy makers from the outset.
WLI will assign a NC who will lead the NTC which will be composed of one member from
each of the key implementing institutions plus one member from the SAG at each of the
benchmark sites. The SAG will include representatives of the civil society, local and
international NGOs, CBOs, the regional hub university and key national universities who are
involved with the work and community members and representatives of FAs, FIGs, WUAs
and producers groups to ensure a broad base of community support and involvement36 in the
benchmark and that the target beneficiaries have direct access to project design and
implementation. A project-controlled invitation of a broad cross-section of relevant partners
and examples of inclusive SAG composition will demonstrate the need to include women and
minority groups. The SAG will elect one of its members to serve annually on the NTC and a
member of the SAG could also be considered as the country representative attending the
PSC. Community awareness of the project will be fostered through regular presentations in
schools (involve students and teachers) and will aim from the outset to engage young adults,
children and women as well as men. Public awareness will also be targeted across all levels
of the project and will be targeted towards the key stakeholders identified in the stakeholder
analysis to be conducted at project inception.
The membership of the NTC in the seven participating countries will include key specialists
and research and extension personnel (see Table 4) who possess technical expertise and
36
Two example models for community involvement highlighted at the Badia workshop were: a) the use of
Extension Advisory Boards in Florida, members are voluntary citizen participants that define needs of the
community. The Extension Service pays for their travel and attendance at meetings and b) in Maghara and
Khaltan (Afrin, Syria) a community committee has been formed for the application of a micro-credit system
and to manage the distribution of loans. Currently farmers are managing their loans and the committee is
helping the farmers to implement suitable soil and water conservation techniques and select viable
diversification options.
29
knowledge related to the integrated benchmark sites in each country. They will report to both
the PMU and the SAG who will be responsible for monitoring progress. The NTC will
nominate the key research and extension leaders and who will undertake the initial project
implementation phase in target areas including the recruiting of frontline extension workers,
identification of and engagement with local NGOs and the formation of FAs and FIGs. The
NTC will undergo an initial needs analysis at project inception and will be trained in the
techniques such as PRA and SWOT where required. The NTC members may then train the
research and extension leaders/ Benchmark Technical Team who will carry out the project
implementation at the target sites. The NTC could also include a liaison person to represent
key governmental decision-making bodies.
3.5.4.5
Project Management Unit (PMU)
Once recruited, the Program Manager will lead a PMU composed of, the WLI Training
Coordinator based at ICARDA, and the NCs based in each of the seven participating NARES
countries. The country coordinator will be from one of the participating NARES or SAG in
each country and will be rotated annually with a representative from one of the other
institutions37. The PMU will address science planning and execution as well as managerial
tasks of the program. PMU members will stay in close contact through both electronic means
and periodic meetings. The PMU will develop and propose annual reports and work plans as
requested by the PSC for presentation to the ICARDA BOT for approval.
3.5.4.6
Program Manager
Day-to-day leadership of WLI will be the responsibility of the PM. In order for the Program
to be planned and launched quickly, an individual from ICARDA will be temporarily
appointed by the DG with approval of the DGs of IWMI and IFPRI for a period of twelve
months. During this period a formal recruitment process will be carried out to identify a
permanent Program Manager for a contract term of three years. The ICARDA MC will
approve the Terms of Reference for the PM, oversee the recruitment and will annually
evaluate staff performance. The PMU will follow protocols established in the MOU in hiring,
managing and (if necessary) ending the term of employment of staff.
In addition to daily program management duties in the PMU, the PM will lead partner and
donor relations, coordinate the PSC, and interact with ICARDA’s management. ICARDA’s
management will schedule the PSC meeting with the ICARDA BOT Program Committee to
ensure timely and high-quality reporting of program activities and progress. The PM will
serve as the public representative of WLI, working closely with the PSC to ensure that WLI
maintains a high and positive profile with investors and the public. The PM will ensure
agreed milestones are being met; organize WLI meetings and reviews; and conduct related
high-level leadership and management tasks.
3.5.4.7
Training Coordinator
A portion of the Project Management Unit responsibilities will be to recruit a full-time
representative of one of the US or regional universities to be based at ICARDA to
specifically coordinate the training element and other coordination between the US and
regional universities, the NARES and the Network of Regional Hub Universities.
Mechanisms will be established to coordinate with universities in the US, either individually
or through a single office that would represent all universities as a coordinating hub.
37
In each country there are variable numbers of NARES institutions involved; however, it was agreed at the
WLI Inception meeting that other institutions may be added, depending on their relevance to the work.
30
The position will be established within the latter portion of the first phase of the project, for
the purposes of providing day-to-day coordination of the extensive project training activities
and serving as an interface for all other activities between the US and regional universities,
the international Centers and NARES. The regional training and communication office will
work in tandem with and as a component of the PMU to ensure the delivery of the overall
work plan.
WLI Project Steering Committee
Project Management Unit & Project Manager and
WLI Training Coordinator
NTC
AREA
NWRA
SAG
Benchmark Site
National Universities
NARES
Network of Regional Hub
Universities
National Coordinator
US University Consortium
US University Training Coordinator
International and Regional Supervisory Role and Management
National Supervisory Role and Management
Y
e
National Management directly related to benchmark
Y
m
e
eY Educational Institutions
International
and Regional Educational Institutions
National
Y
m
n
e
e
m
m 1: WLI Implementation and Extension Structure showing the Project
n
Figure
ie Steering Committee (PSC), Project
Management
Unit (PMU), Project Manager (PM), Training Coordinator National Coordinators (NC), the
e
sn
National
in Technical Committees (NTC), the Site Advisory Group (SAG), NARES institutions, Regional Hub
University, National University, US universities and US University Training Coordinator.
s
ti
i
h
s
ts
e
h
t
et
o
h
31
h
n
e
e
o
l
n
yo
lo
n
3.5.4.8
CGIAR Centers
The roles of the three CGIAR centers will be to connect the seven countries to the water and
policy lessons learned from ICARDA, IFPRI and IWMI’s global experiences. In addition
ICARDA will be responsible for coordination and hosting the project from its suite of
regional offices while it simultaneously negotiates with NARES to provide a set of
benchmark sites, data and field tested activities as discussed in the introduction.
3.5.4.9 NARES
ICARDA communicated with its traditional partners who work with water and land
management at the beginning of the project effort. Key individuals have become the WLI
focal points for institutions and countries throughout the series of agro-ecological workshops.
Will these people necessarily transition into the National Coordinators??? For extensive lists
of key personnel in each participating country please see section 3.5 in each bilateral
proposal.
Table 8a: NARES Institutions and University Contacts in Irrigated Benchmark Sites
Countries Acronyms
Institution Full Titles
WLI Interim Site
Coordinators NEED INPUT
Egypt
ASU
Ministry of Agriculture and Land
Reclamation, Agricultural
Research Center
Ministry of Water Resources and
Irrigation
National Water Research Center
Ain Shams University
AUC
DDC
BU
American University in Cairo,
Desert Development Center
Benha University
CU
Cairo University
ZU
Zagazig University
MOA
SBAR
UB
AREA
State Board for Agricultural
Research
University of Baghdad
Ministry of Agriculture &
Irrigation
Agricultural Research and
Extension Authority
National Water Resources
Authority
University of Aden
University of Sana’a
H.E. Mr Amin Abaza. Minister
Prof Dr. Aymen Abou Hadid
(Prof Dr Hamdi Khalifa)
H.E. Dr Mohamed Nasr El Din
Allam, Minister
(Dr Ahmed Khater)
Prof Dr Essam Fayed, Dean,
Faculty of Agriculture
Dr Richard Tutwiler, Director
(Dr Tina Jaskolski)
Prof Dr Mohamed B.B. Al Alfi,
Dean, Faculty of Agriculture
Prof Dr Ali A. Higm, Dean Faculty
of Agriculture
Prof Dr Mohamed B. A. Ashour,
Dean of Agriculture
Dr Bader Saleh, DG
(Dr Ahmed Adnan A. Alfalahi)
To be determined
H.E. Dr Mansour Al-Howshabi
Dr Ismail Muharram, DG
(Dr Khader Atroosh)
MALR
ARC
MWRI
NWRC
IraqIrrigated
Yemen
NWRA
UA
US
32
Salem H Bashoaib, Chairman
(Dr Esam Mohamed Obadi)
To be determined
To be determined
Table 8b: NARES Institutions and University Contacts in Rainfed Benchmark Sites
Countries Acronyms
Institution Full Titles
WLI Interim Site
Coordinators NEED INPUT
Dr Bader Saleh, DG
(Dr Ahmed Adnan A. Alfalahi)
Dr Nazar Qibi, Vice President
(Dr Ahmed Hachem)
Dr Nahla Hwalla, Dean, Faculty of
Agriculture
(Dr Nadim Farajalla)
Dr Michel Afram
(Dr Chafic Estephan)
To be determined
IraqRainfed
MOA
SBAR
MU
State Board for Agricultural
Research
Mosul University
Lebanon
AUB
American University of Beirut
LARI
Lebanese Agriculture Research
Institute
Lebanese American University
LAU
Syria
AU
DU
GCSAR
MIP
Aleppo University
Damascus University
General Commission for
Scientific Agricultural
Research
Modernization of Irrigation
Project
Dr Nizar Akeel, President
Dr Wael Mualla, President
Dr Walid Tawil, DG
(Dr Awadis Arslan)
Eng Ahmed Al-Kadri
Table 8c: NARES Institutions and University Contacts in Rangeland Benchmark Sites
Countries Acronyms
Jordan
JUST
NCARE
UJ
WERSC
Palestine
ANU
ARIJ
Institution Full Titles
WLI Interim Site
Coordinators NEED INPUT
Jordan University of Science and
Technology
National Center for Agricultural
Research and Extension
University of Jordan, Water and
Environmental Research Study
Center
Munir J. Mohammad Rusan, Dean,
Faculty of Agriculture
Dr Faisal Awawdeh, DG
(Dr Esmat Al Karadshed)
Dr Buttros Hattar, Director
An Najah
To be determined
Dr Jad Isaac
(Mr Nader Hreimat)
Dr Rezq A.s. Basheer-Salimia,
Dean, Faculty of Agriculture
Dr Jamal Talab Al Amleh, General
Manager
H.E. Mr Ismail Daiq, Minister
(Dr Ali Fatafta, DG)
HU
Applied Research InstituteJerusalem
Hebron University
LRC
Land Research Center
MOA
Ministry of Agriculture
National Agricultural Research
Center
3.5.4.10
US Universities: Enhancement and Collaboration
The WLI will draw upon US university expertise for training, applied research, and technical
assistance. Table 5 in Appendix 4, highlights the comparative advantage of the universities
in the key priority issues of the WLI particularly when allied with direct experience in the
participating countries. However as shown in the university matrix Table 2 all the
participating US universities have very strong departments covering many of the key issues
of the WLI, as shown in their capability statements, all of which will be leveraged for the
33
capacity building and training element of the WLI. The US university consortium will be
managed by a US University Coordinator based in the US, in tandem with the WLI Training
Coordinator based in the Project Management Unit (PMU) at ICARDA. The WLI Training
Coordinator will be in direct communication with the Network of Regional Hub Universities
and the respective NARES to further ensure best fit according to training and research needs
and priorities.
3.5.5
Monitoring and Evaluation
Monitoring and evaluation will be designed from the beginning of the project under the
auspices of the PMU at ICARDA, developing objectively verifiable indicators determined
within the predominant thematic groups38 of the WLI and WLI. Wherever possible,
particularly within the major benchmark types, the same indicators and methodologies will be
used across countries. It is anticipated that there will be a high level of congruence between
the benchmark sites of the three agro-ecologies although relevant adjustments for country
specific factors will be made. The WLI portal will be a dynamic tool in the WLI M&E
system used for data presentation and sharing among participating countries. M&E was
considered throughout the three agro-ecological workshops, culminating in recommendations
from a breakout group in the final workshop including the need for:
-
-
Most WLI partners to do a benchmark site diagnosis at the beginning of the project
cycle to establish baseline data and indicators.
A review and assessment of data already collected under the Water Benchmark Sites
to assess its quality, relevance and charting of its use.
The development of a Project Quality Assurance Plan for the WLI using existing
models that can be adapted quickly including a review of the existing M&E system
from the Water Benchmark project (outlined below) and a comparison of it with the
AKI system.
Quarterly reports to be electronic with standardized fields that can be mapped and
uploaded automatically to websites, using a “write once” principle.
In addition the following tasks were to be carried out within the timeframe and budget of the
present initiation phase of the WLI to further inform the development of baseline indicators
and surveys.
38
For example, modelling, water harvesting, salinity, policy, soil conservation, range and livestock
management, community empowerment.
34
Table 9: Tasks that were identified as needing attention as soon as possible in the current grant.
Task
Approach
Timing
1. Review of e-learning and
Hire a consultant to gather info; use
As soon as possible under
availability of strategic
ELC to analyze and make further
the current grant
plans for education
recommendations
2. Review of policies
Hire a local consultant in each
Identify specific policies
affecting agriculture in
country; use a standard template and needing adjustment under
WLI
TORs for the review; let PSC decide the existing grant
how to synthesize across countries
3. Assessment of decisionForm a thematic group on models
Identify the model with
support models for use in
and consult all other thematic groups greatest applicability in
WLI
to answer the question “A model for current grant; assign
hat?”
students to adapt model
4. Review of Extension
Form a thematic group on Extension Complete the baseline
Advisory Boards as a
and hire a consultant to describe
under the current grant;
model in the WLI;
baseline conditions and draft SREP
outline the strategic plan
establish SREP
5. Review status quo of
Hire a local consultant in each
Complete assessment
associations in each
country; use a standard template and under the current grant
country and compare best
TORs for the review; let PSC decide
practices
how to synthesize across countries
The following is an outline of the different types of indicators that will be used to assess the
performance and impact of the research, education and extension and technology transfer
elements of the WLI. These are generalized at the moment but will be made more precise as a
part the work plan and after being subject to the review process described above. M&E will
be an integral part of the Project Management Unit and the ICARDA Socio-Economic and
Policy Research Program (SEPR) along with the Knowledge Sharing (KS) Specialist at
ICARDA who will oversee and organize a KS/M&E manual to guide National Coordinators
for the participating countries and to provide consistency across countries on the methods and
measurements selected. This has already been accomplished successfully for the Water
Benchmarks of CWANA Project39 (see http://icardahost.icarda.cgiar.org:8081/wbm/index.php ) that
was funded by AFESD, IFAD and the OFID Fund. The same methodology will be adapted
for use in the present project.
1. Baseline, Benchmark and Decision-Support Model Indicators
a. Baseline data on the current agricultural and water productivity levels; crop and
livestock intensification and diversification; levels of knowledge, skills and attitudes of
different categories of farmers; and current levels of farm household income, rural
employment and other rural livelihood indicators.
b. Benchmark data on the current number, type and membership participation levels of
different farmer and producer groups; and comparable benchmark data that will
measure the current capacity, structure and activities being carried out by the selected
agricultural extension organizations slated to be strengthened by this project.
c. Although it is not expected to end up with a standard model that will work in all
countries without adaptation, minimum inputs necessary to run the decision-support
model are a high priority for the first year. To the greatest extent possible the model
39
Mohammad Samir El-Habbab A. 2008. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for Community-Based Optimization
of the Management of Scarce Water Resources in Agriculture in West Asia and North Africa. Report No. 6.
ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria. iv+104 pp. ISBN: 92-9127-209-6.
35
will be able to depict the baseline situation for each benchmark site within the first year
of the project in every country.
2. Input Indicators will assess progress, in implementing:
a. Policy changes, including the decentralization of the extension system,
b. Investments in physical infrastructure,
c. Investments in human resource development,
d. Enhancement of program delivery through a more market-driven agricultural research
and extension system.
3. Output Indicators to measure and assess improvements in extension system(s)
performance, including:
a. Use of participatory methods and farmer-led program-planning boards
(decentralization),
b. Number of producer groups organized by socio-economic status and gender (social
capital),
c. Number and type of major extension program activities completed to carry out
technology transfer, creating awareness and providing training for small-scale and
women farmers on new high value crop and livestock systems, plus sustainable natural
resources management practices,
d. Indicators to assess information and communications technology (ICT) activities,
outputs and accomplishments.
4. Impact Indicators are needed to assess progress in:
a. Increasing water productivity (more income/drop),
b. Crop and/or livestock diversification and intensification,
c. Changes in the knowledge, skills and attitudes of different categories of farmers,
d. Increasing the numbers and sustainability of farmer and producer groups,
e. Impact on rural livelihoods, including household income and rural employment,
f. Achieving long-term institutional sustainability of the transformed extension system.
5. Outcome indicators are needed to assess achievement of objectives:
g. Evidence of increase income in participating households (e.g., proxies such as girls
attending school),
h. New crops or products in the market,
i. New water management systems used,
j. New INRM organizations, new policies for water management at local, regional, or
national levels,
k. Improved land use through new cropping/grazing practices,
l. Less land degradation as evidenced by transects (need baseline data),
m. Local systems of water quality monitoring established; proxies such as water
monitoring kits distributed,
n. More frequent extension visits, more extension hires; research publications, number of
faculty with advanced degrees, new courses offered, etc.
The M&E plan is intended to be used as a starting point and not as a definitive plan—i.e., a
“living” document for WLI and for the PMU. Indicators, operational definitions, and basic
assumptions will most likely go through revisions and modifications by the users as tools are
being applied and activities progress.
36
3.5.6
Responsibilities and Relationships
Regional: The WLI Project Management Unit (PMU) based at ICARDA will oversee
regional program implementation, supported by the US universities, IWMI and IFPRI
partners, NARES and regional universities with the view of eventual turnover of activities to
Middle Eastern partners after completion of the project. The Project Manager for the
Regional Project will interact directly with the Cognizant Technical Officer(s) (CTOs)
assigned by USAID for implementation of WLI, for both administrative and technical
directions.
National: If agreeable to donor and partners, it is suggested to house the National
Coordinator (NC) for each country in the ICARDA regional program offices where they are
available (e.g. ICARDA– Cairo, Egypt; ICARDA – Amman, Jordan; ICARDA-Beirut,
Lebanon; ICARDA-HQ - Aleppo, Syria). Where an ICARDA regional operation does not
have an office in country, e.g. Palestine, Iraq and Yemen, a PMU-NARES office will be
established in cooperation with a hosting partner organization.
USAID Missions: Most of the funding for the WLI comes from the USAID Missions in
participating countries; therefore, each of the Missions should assign a CTO for the work
done in country.
USAID Office of Middle East Programs (OMEP) in Cairo, Egypt: The project was designed
with regional synergies and transfer of international public goods in mind; therefore, to insure
that the program is more than the sum of its parts, and to continuously provide supervisory
coverage when Mission staff rotate (a major disruption in some countries), the USAID Office
of Middle East Programs (OMEP) is suggested to contribute to supervision of the WLI with
OMEP dealing with day-to-day issues in the region and supervising the work in Syria, since
there is no USAID Mission in Syria.
USAID Office of Technical Support for the Middle East (ME/TS) in Washington, DC:
Overall responsibility for oversight and supervision could be assigned to ME/TS so keep
management in Washington appraised of progress and to also liaise on a regular basis with
the US university teams that are contributing to the work, funded by pass through
contributions from the budgets flowing to ICARDA. ME/TS would also be responsible for
funds transfers to US universities using the Public International Organization (PIO) status of
ICARDA as a member of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
(CGIAR) and the existing mechanism for funding through USAID’s Office of Economic
Growth, Agriculture and Trade (EGAT).
Teamwork and coordination among Missions, OMEP and ME/TS: To leverage the
contributions from Missions it is suggested that AME/TS and OMEP split the costs of the
regional budget – representing about one-tenth of the overall budget for a fully funded WLI.
Via EGAT's core contribution, USAID has been backing the CGIAR centers, including
ICARDA, for many years. EGAT and ME have been advocating moving from many
small projects to bigger and more meaningful longer-term efforts, building on and linking
together mutually re-enforcing activities at the national level. ME/TS has been advocating an
environment and food security effort that gathers the USAID Missions around agriculture and
natural resources management to address the problems that arose in 2008 with food and fuel
price hikes that deeply affected low-income groups. Moreover, with climate change
adaptation taking on new importance and urgency, the WLI will be well positioned to help
meet one of the greatest adaptation needs--resilient management and use of water resources.
37
The value of the WLI for USAID is its ability to work bilaterally but also link Mission efforts
regionally to transfer important international public goods. Successes in one country can
easily be transferred to other partners using this approach. It focuses on both water (linking to
the Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act -- which now includes more inclusive language for
safe water use) and livelihoods (focusing on value added crops, market chains and links to the
private sector). Underpinning both are improved environmental services that also reduce
degradation and desertification pressures.
4.
Reporting Requirements
Inception Report/ Life of Program Work Plan – within a month after the grant is awarded,
the Recipient will submit a brief inception report to USAID. The inception report will outline
the Life of Program Work Plan (LOP). The LOP will be submitted within 60 days after the
award. The LOP will indicate the team’s schedule for data collection, analysis and other
activities. It will also include expected outputs and indicators that will be the bases for
measuring the progress towards the attainment of the program’s objectives.
Annual Work Plan and Monitoring and Evaluation Plan – within six weeks after
approval by USAID, the Grantee will submit its Annual Work Plan, outlining the specific
activities including progress indicators, time line and budget for each core activity for the
first year of implementation. Succeeding annual work plans will be submitted one month
prior to year end. The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) plan will also be submitted a
month after approval of the LOP. The M&E plan will be prepared in consultation with
USAID and will include gender disaggregated reporting as applicable.
Quarterly Reports - Each report should have sections that present information on the
progress of the program. These reports will include the following sections:
a. Comparison of actual accomplishments with the indicators and accomplishments
established for the period in the approved work plans. This section should include the
results of an analysis by the recipient on the progress of the work, and an assessment
of performance during the reporting period.
b. Explanation and reasons for short falls in the accomplishment of established goals in
the M&E plan as required.
c. A summary of project expenditures for the reporting quarter. This summary must
include expenditures for the quarter and the total expenditures of the agreement as of
the last day of the reporting period.
d. The M&E plan reporting requirements should be attached with the status of the
reporting requirements updated for the period of the report.
e. Any other relevant information on program implementation requested by USAID.
Annual Report - At the end of each Annual Work Plan period, an annual report will be
required. This annual report can be included as part of the fourth quarterly report submitted
above. The annual report will provide a summary of the year’s activities and will follow the
same outline as the quarterly report except it will provide summarized information for the
year and will not be a repeat of information from each quarterly report.
Submission of Reports – Reports are due within ten working days after the last day of the
reporting period.
38
Database Reporting Requirements – ICARDA will use a geo-referenced management
information system to track program and project information for all WLI activities through
efforts housed in the GIS Unit. The purpose of this database is to track and monitor research
for development projects, and to maintaining coordination between Missions, OMEP and
ME.TS in Washington and other donors. This reporting process will supports requirement
that ICARDA provide relevant and accurate information to the participating ministries in
each of the partner countries. It will prevent duplication, allow layering of previously
implemented efforts and show degrees of progress attained by each country – identifying
those who are performing well and those who are not to guide future assistance.
USAID uses GeoBase in Afghanistan where geo-referencing of activities through time is
extremely helpful and the Grantee shall liaise with ME/TS and OMEP to assure that to the
greatest degree possible the information collected will conform to standards already
established by USAID. ICARDA will update this information and provide a summary as part
of the annual report and when relevant include updates in the Quarterly reports. The
Recipient will organize the information for entry via an Internet website; USAID will provide
the URL address, and a user ID/password. ICARDA will assign one person as the primary
point of contact for GeoBase in each country and they will receive training from the USAID
Database Manager to utilize the system. A comprehensive Geobase user manual which will
be provided after the award, which provides detailed information on the required information
and processes needed for managing GeoBase.
5.
Other Information
Working in the WLI countries has several challenges. Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine and Yemen
have issues with security. Syria has a recent thaw in its relationship with the US but
significant obstacles remain from past actions and reactions such as the Syrian Accountability
Act that prevents importation of some important hardware and software. ICARDA will
overcome these obstacles because of its strong linkages and partnerships with the countries
involved in the WLI, building on its 32-year-long history of collaboration with NARES,
which has been widely acclaimed among the CGIAR Centers. It is for this reason that USAID
should use an assistance mechanism – as opposed to an acquisition mechanism – as the rules
and regulations concerning security measures are fundamentally different. While in most
places the security situation can be described as calm, there remain areas where elements of
the population continue to work to undermine the progress and development of the country;
therefore, the potential for random or targeted acts against WLI personnel and US
implementing partners will not be down-played.
Security for the recipient’s personnel and offices will be the responsibility of ICARDA. The
management of ICARDA shall assess the security situation in every country of the WLI, and
particularly in the provinces targeted by the program, and institute appropriate measures.
ICARDA will establish a security protocol allowing completion of the recipient’s obligations
in this environment. If security factors are expected to disrupt implementation or to cause
delay in attaining established targets, it will be ICARDA’s responsibility to immediately
notify USAID. Therefore, as part of the application, a security plan and budget was
incorporated in the submission. The plan includes adequate requirements for protecting all
personnel in the field and at the base of operations, contingency planning in case of
emergency evacuation as well a chain of command for communication and reporting
instructions. The security policies shall be made available for review (upon USAID request).
39
6.
Program Team
The core program team will be composed of the Project Manager, a National Coordinator in
every country, the ICARDA Regional Coordinators, a Training Coordinator at ICARDA HQ
and a U.S. based Training Coordinator at one of the participating US universities. ICARDA,
IWMI, IFPRI and National Programs (see short biographical statements of participants in the
consortium on the WLI website (INSERT WEBSITE LINK).
The project anticipates the need for scientific, administrative and logistical services. At a
minimum the scientific contributions will come from fields such as hydrology, water
management, land management, socio-economics, livestock/rangelands and horticulture.
Gender experts, educators and extension staff from the consortium will provide needed skills
as the needs arise.
Coordination with the US universities has been enabled through teleconferencing and a
structure composed of a coordinating university (UF) and two key contacts (a primary contact
and a back-up) at each of the other universities (TAMU, UC-D, UC-R, UIUC, USU).
Coordinators identified a total of 127 interested university staff. See the matrix below that
includes the main categories of desired disciplines. The Excel Sheet, available upon request,
also shows which staff also have capability to provide advice on the cross-cutting issues of
extension, capacity development, socio-economics and policy. Therefore, when WLI makes a
request for a particular discipline the coordinating team can easily recruit consultants. Using a
consortium approach spreads the demand across a range of suppliers who have different
availability, mostly due to variations in teaching schedules in their home universities.
Table 10: Available US University Consultants for Specific Disciplines in the WLI
Discipline
TAMU UC-D&R
UF
UIUC USU
Total
Irrigation and Water Management
19
8
9
14
8
58
Water Systems and Processing
0
0
0
11
0
11
Value-Added Agriculture
5
14
2
13
2
36
Livestock and Range
8
1
1
0
3
13
Biodiversity and Integrated Gene
Management
9
0
0
0
0
9
All disciplines total
41
23
12
38
13
127
7.
Substantial Involvement
The grant agreement would require USAID approval of key personnel, the LOP Work Plan,
and Annual Work Plan. USAID approval will be preferred in writing by the Agreement
Officer and Cognizant Technical Officer.
40
8.
Key Personnel
(a) The key positions for performance of this Cooperative Agreement may be proposed from the
below list based on an applicant’s technical approach.
1.
2.
3.
4.
WLI Project Manager (for regional proposal)
WLI Training Coordinator at ICARDA (for regional proposal)
WLI Training Coordinator at a US University (for regional proposal)
WLI National Coordinator (for each bilateral proposal)
The positions specified above are considered to be essential to the work being performed under this
agreement. Prior to replacing any of the individuals in a key position, ICARDA shall notify both the
Agreement Officer and the USAID CTO reasonably in advance to permit evaluation of the impact on
the program. Replacements for key positions shall be made in consultation with the CTO.
9.
Cost Sharing
Cost sharing is an important indication of commitment. Therefore, each of the partners has been asked
to list what they can contribute in-kind or in terms of programs with resources that can be expected to
interact with the WLI. (ALL PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS ARE EXPECTED TO CONCISELY
LIST WHAT YOU WILL MAKE AVAILABLE.)
NEED INPUT
10.
Gantt Chart
Insert notes?
41
Table 11. WLI Activities by year and quarter
Year 1 (2009)
1 2 3 4
1.1 Develop feasible/sustainable policy recs at benchmark site
1.1.1 Develop and implement a strategic policy plan for the benchmark site
1.1.2 Policy analysis and support provided to key institutions
1.1.3 Validated policy recs extended to national/provincial govts
1.2 Enhanced extension system for sustainable water/land use practices
1.2.1 Dev working partnerships among locals, CGIAR Centers, universities
1.2.2 Create links between national/provincial ag res and ext organizations
1.2.3 Facilitate reorientation of existing national extension systems
1.3 Tools and structures for the effective implementation of the WLI
1.3.1 Development of WLI portal for knowledge sharing and training
1.3.2 Hiring of key staff
1.3.3 Initiate knowledge sharing plan
1.3.4 Develop monitoring and evaluation system
1.3.5 Develop scaling-up plan for selected benchmark site
1.4 Integrated watershed decision-support improvement model
1.4.1 Model assessment, verification and selection
1.4.2 Baseline study for model selection and M&E
1.4.3 Baseline analysis including uncertainty and risk analysis
1.4.4 Benchmark development including study findings
1.4.5 Develop and test model with relevant stakeholders
1.4.6 Test decision-support capability of model
1.4.7 Conduct analysis of relevant policies
1.4.8 Identify feasible changes to existing policies and strategies
1.5 Create SAG for participation in strategy/development at site
1.5.1 Conduct stakeholder analysis of site identifying key partners for the SAG
1.5.2 Formation of the SAG
1.5.3 Establish the position and role of the SAG within the WLI
1.5.4. Publicize the goal of the WLI to community and regional partners
2.1. Training and e-learning plan developed/carried out at site
2.1.1 Establish e-learning committee
2.1.2 Carry out the needs and resource matching through the WLI portal
2.1.3 Develop site training plan including the allocation of post-grad degrees
2.1.4 Training needs assessment and develop curricula for key stakeholders
42
Year 2 (2010)
1 2 3 4
Year 3 (2011)
1 2 3 4
Year 4 (2012)
1 2 3 4
Year 5 (2013)
1 2 3 4
Year 6 (2014)
1 2 3 4
Table 11 Cont’d - WLI Activities by year and quarter
Year 1 (2009)
1 2 3 4
2.1. Cont’d-Training and e-learning plan developed/carried out at site
2.1.5 Tender out English and computer training skills; e-learning materials
2.1.6 Infrastructure and capacity for local/regional university e-learning
2.1.7 Enrol post-graduate degree programs for relevant stakeholders
2.2 Train selected benchmark site technical team
2.2.1 Identify key members of the tech teams and assess training needs
2.2.2 Carry out train-the-trainer courses in PRA, SWOT and other techniques
2.3 Dissemination of knowledge and public goods to stakeholders
2.3.1 Develop knowledge sharing plan
2.3.2 Develop, aggregate and adapt, training and research materials/pubs
2.3.3 Hold regional/national conferences, workshops and KS for a
2.3.4 Participate in non-WLI affiliated intnl conferences and workshops
3.1 Appropriate water and land use technologies identified and tested
3.1.1 Introduce identified and tested water-use mgmt techs for immediate use
3.1.2 Develop a scaling up strategy for the selected benchmark site
3.1.3 Ensure dissemination of methods alongside crop/livelihood technologies
3.1.4 Document that water and land use at the benchmark site improved
3.1.5 Increase the capacity of communities to manage water use thru WUAs
3.2 Livelihood study and stakeholder analysis/SREP
3.2.1 Conduct livelihood study and stakeholder analysis
3.2.2 Develop SREP for the selected benchmark site
3.2.3 Identify constraints to implementing identified improved technologies
3.3 Implementation of improved livelihood strategies
3.3.1 Test, refine, adapt, diffuse water efficient crop/livestock methods
3.3.2 Organize FAs, FIGs, SHGs to grow/market water efficient crops
3.3.3 Conduct exposure visits for FIGs and FAs
3.3.4 Facilitate contracts and agreements between FIGs and buyers
3.3.5 Conduct targeted training for producer groups
3.3.6 Facilitate inputs in the inception
3.3.7 Produce crop or product to specification
3.3.8 Harvest handle and deliver crop/product
3.3.9 Empirically document that livelihoods in the site have been improved
43
Year 2 (2010)
1 2 3 4
Year 3 (2011)
1 2 3 4
Year 4 (2012)
1 2 3 4
Year 5 (2013)
1 2 3 4
Year 6 (2014)
1 2 3 4
Table 12 Schedule of meetings and workshops by year and quarter
Year 1 (2009)
1 2 3 4
Regional Steering Committee Meetings
National Technical Meetings
Thematic Group on Modelling
Thematic Group on M&E KS
Thematic Group on Irrig and Water Mgmt, Water Systems and Processing
Thematic Group on Value-Added Agriculture
Thematic Group on Extension and Education
Thematic Group on Livestock and Range
End of first five year phase meeting
ICARDA Annual Audit (Dec-Feb)
44
Year 2 (2010)
1 2 3 4
Year 3 (2011)
1 2 3 4
Year 4 (2012)
1 2 3 4
Year 5 (2013)
1 2 3 4
Year 6 (2014)
1 2 3 4
Appendix 1: WLI Regional Budget Estimation
Unit cost
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Total
Personnel
Project Manager at ICARDA
126,000
100%
126,000
131,040
136,282
141,733
147,402
682,457
Regional Coordinator (WARP: Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine)
Regional Coordinator (NVSSARP: Egypt)
126,000
126,000
20%
5%
25,200
6,300
26,208
6,552
27,256
6,814
28,347
7,087
29,480
7,370
136,491
34,123
Regional Coordinator (APRP: Yemen)
Assistant DG (Gov Liaison) Syria
126,000
126,000
5%
5%
6,300
6,300
6,552
6,552
6,814
6,814
7,087
7,087
7,370
7,370
34,123
34,123
Training Coordinator at ICARDA
126,000
100%
126,000
131,040
136,282
141,733
147,402
682,457
12,000
12,000
100%
100%
12,000
12,000
12,480
12,480
12,979
12,979
13,498
13,498
14,038
14,038
64,996
64,996
126,000
30,000
100%
100%
126,000
30,000
131,040
31,200
136,282
32,448
141,733
33,746
147,402
35,096
682,457
162,490
Steering Committee Meeting (Facilities & Arrangements)
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,400
10,816
11,249
11,699
54,163
Travel and 2-Week Visits of Intnl Staff (US Univ, IWMI, IFPRI)
79,500
79,500
79,500
82,680
85,987
89,427
93,004
430,598
TA Travel (Regional Coordinators)
TA Travel (Hydrologist)
23,900
10,000
23,900
10,000
23,900
10,000
24,856
10,400
25,850
10,816
26,884
11,249
27,960
11,699
129,450
54,163
TA Travel (Water Specialist)
TA Travel (Land Management Specialist)
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,400
10,400
10,816
10,816
11,249
11,249
11,699
11,699
54,163
54,163
TA Travel (Socio-economist)
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,400
10,816
11,249
11,699
54,163
TA Travel (Rangeland Specialist)
TA Travel (Value added agriculture)
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,400
10,400
10,816
10,816
11,249
11,249
11,699
11,699
54,163
54,163
Regional Thematic Meetings (3 per year)
Audio Visual Equipment
45,000
20,000
45,000
20,000
45,000
20,000
46,800
0
48,672
0
50,619
0
52,644
0
243,735
20,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,200
5,200
5,408
5,408
5,624
5,624
5,849
5,849
27,082
27,082
Total Direct Costs
724,500
753,480
783,619
814,964
847,563
3,924,126
Total Indirect Costs
149,392
155,368
161,582
168,046
174,767
809,155
Grand Total Regional
873,892
908,848
945,201
983,010
1,022,330
4,733,280
Assistant to Project Manager at ICARDA
Assistant to Training Coordinator at ICARDA
Coordinator (US Universities in USA)
Assistant to US Coordinator in USA
Other
Transportation
Communication
45
Table 13: WLI Bilateral Budget Estimation P 1/2
Percentage
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Total
Personnel
National Coordinator (NC)
18,000
18,000
100%
18,000
18,720
19,469
20,248
21,057
97,494
National Program Officer (Water and Land)
12,000
12,000
100%
12,000
12,480
12,979
13,498
14,038
64,996
National Program Officer (Policy and Socio-economics)
Research Assistants (2)
12,000
8,000
12,000
8,000
100%
200%
12,000
16,000
12,480
16,640
12,979
17,306
13,498
17,998
14,038
18,718
64,996
86,661
8,000
6,000
8,000
6,000
100%
100%
8,000
6,000
8,320
6,240
8,653
6,490
8,999
6,749
9,359
7,019
43,331
32,498
Regional Coordinator
126,000
126,000
5%
6,300
6,552
6,814
7,087
7,370
34,123
Hydrologist
126,000
126,000
5%
6,300
6,552
6,814
7,087
7,370
34,123
Water Specialist
Land Management Specialist
126,000
126,000
126,000
126,000
5%
5%
6,300
6,300
6,552
6,552
6,814
6,814
7,087
7,087
7,370
7,370
34,123
34,123
Socio-economist
Rangeland Specialist
126,000
126,000
126,000
126,000
5%
5%
6,300
6,300
6,552
6,552
6,814
6,814
7,087
7,087
7,370
7,370
34,123
34,123
Value Added Agriculture
126,000
126,000
5%
6,300
6,552
6,814
7,087
7,370
34,123
116,100
120,744
125,574
130,597
135,821
628,835
Administrative Assistant
Driver
Technical Assistance
Sub-total Personnel
Travel
International travel (1 visit to HQ/year)
National Coordinator (2 weeks)
2,458
2,500
2,500
2,600
2,704
2,812
2,925
13,541
National Program Officer (Water and Land)
National Program Officer (Policy and Socio-economics)
2,458
2,458
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,600
2,600
2,704
2,704
2,812
2,812
2,925
2,925
13,541
13,541
15,000
15,000
15,000
15,600
16,224
16,873
17,548
81,245
22,500
23,400
24,336
25,309
26,322
121,867
Local travel
Sub-total Travel
Operational
Establishment of Benchmark sites
0
30,000
0
0
0
0
30,000
Field work
0
120,000
124,800
129,792
134,984
140,383
649,959
Materials and Supplies
Security program
0
0
150,000
10,000
156,000
10,400
162,240
10,816
168,730
11,249
175,479
11,699
812,448
54,163
Note Yellow highlighting needs input on differences in employment costs from one county to another.
46
Table 13 WLI Bilateral Budget Estimation P 2/2
Percentage
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Total
60,000
120,000
0
24,000
0
24,960
0
25,958
0
26,997
60,000
221,915
180,000
24,000
24,960
25,958
26,997
281,915
Capital items
Vehicles (2)
Field Equipment
60,000
120,000
60,000
120,000
Sub-total Capital
Meetings
Project Steering Committee (2/country)
2,950
3,000
3,000
3,120
3,245
3,375
3,510
16,249
NTC (5 National Project Staff+30 NARES+3 Itnl Staff)
14,675
14,700
14,700
15,288
15,900
16,536
17,197
79,620
Facilities and Arrangements
Thematic Groups (Participation in 3 meetings per year)
10,000
64,125
10,000
64,200
10,000
64,200
10,400
66,768
10,816
69,439
11,249
72,216
11,699
75,105
54,163
347,728
Facilities and Arrangements (when hosting)
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,400
10,816
11,249
11,699
54,163
101,900
105,976
110,215
114,624
119,209
551,923
Sub-total Meetings
Training
PhD Students (3) US Universities
MS (5) Regional Universities
Short-term Training Courses (15/ 3 Courses / Year)
English Language Training Courses (5/Course/Year)
151,500
115,000
151,500
115,000
151,500
115,000
157,560
119,600
163,862
124,384
170,417
129,359
177,234
134,534
820,573
622,877
16,500
10,000
16,500
10,000
16,500
10,000
17,160
10,400
17,846
10,816
18,560
11,249
19,303
11,699
89,369
54,163
293,000
304,720
316,909
329,585
342,769
1,586,983
Sub-total Training
M&E plus Mid term and Final Assessments
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
125,000
7,000
7,000
7,000
7,280
7,571
7,874
8,189
37,914
Public Awareness and Info Dissemination
Web-portal
12,000
5,000
12,000
5,000
12,000
5,000
12,480
5,200
12,979
5,408
13,498
5,624
14,038
5,849
64,996
27,082
Farmer Field Days / Schools
Traveling Workshops (1 Intl. & 2 In-Country / Year)
20,000
18,000
20,000
18,000
20,000
18,000
20,800
18,720
21,632
19,469
22,497
20,248
23,397
21,057
108,326
97,494
62,000
64,480
67,059
69,742
72,531
335,812
1,110,500
990,720
1,029,349
1,069,523
1,111,304
5,311,395
228,985
204,286
212,252
220,536
229,151
1,095,210
1,339,485
1,195,006
1,241,601
1,290,058
1,340,454
6,406,605
Knowledge sharing
E-learning
Sub-total Knowledge sharing
Total Direct Costs
Total Indirect Costs
Grand Total National
47
Appendix 2: Logframe WLI
NARRATIVE
Goal
Purpose
The goal of WLI is to improve
the livelihoods of households
and communities in the
benchmark sites of the seven
participating countries by
increasing economic, social
and educational opportunities
through addressing the key
priority issues identified in
each country.
To pilot test a sustainable and
integrated water, land use and
livelihoods strategy in the
benchmark sites for scaling up,
which will optimize new and
income generating crop and
livestock activities.
Outputs 1. Integrated water and landuse strategies for policymaking, tools for
sustainable benchmark
management and
organizational mechanisms
for community inclusion at
the benchmark sites.
VERIFIABLE
INDICATOR
Improved rural livelihoods
and on-farm incomes
through improved and
sustainable land and water
management practices.
MEANS OF
VERIFICATION
National and
project statistics
and research
results.
ASSUMPTIONS
Improved policies,
methodologies, human
capacity, technologies,
extension systems and
recommendations available
to be adopted by additional
sites within the seven
participating countries.
 Strategic benchmark
policy plan and
recommendations
 A decision-support
model in place by year 3
that can be further
refined and used by
NARES decisionmakers in the
benchmark site.
Government
reports, key
NARES and other
Ministry reports,
project reports and
publications.
That policies and
structures within
each country support
pilot test adoption.
Workshops, project
document unit
created to host
source materials
and new data.
That the institutional
model will be
adopted.
 WLI portal.
2. Enhanced knowledge, skills
and qualifications for key
stakeholders in the
benchmark sites.
 M&E plan and system.
 3 PhDs, 5 MSc degrees
at the end of the bilateral
phase of the project.
 Key reps of the main
stakeholder groups
operating in the
benchmark site trained.
 Operational e-learning
committee.
 Operational key
stakeholder training and
e-learning plan.
 Operational knowledge
sharing plan developed.
48
Model outputs
Publications and
Reports. Decisionsupport software
and manuals in
English and
Arabic.
Internationally and
nationally
appropriate
certificates and
diplomas and
training records for
selected
participants.
That financial
support is sufficient
and all partners
collaborate fully.
That the model will
enhance
understanding and
targeted
implementation of
improved techniques
That training in
improved techniques
will lead to their
implementation at
farmer level.
3. Improved rural livelihoods
of farmers in the benchmark
sites through the adoption
of sustainable land and
water management practices
and livelihood strategies.
 Number of WUAs and
farmer interest groups
utilizing ‘new’
sustainable water use
technologies and land
management practices.
 Number of farmer
interest groups
organized.
 Number of livelihood
opportunities increased.
 Number of new HV crop
and livestock systems
introduced.
“Before and after”
documentation and
testimonies from
farms/associations.
Technology
adoption
assessment
Results from
farmers fields.
Reports.
Results reach the
farm level and that
NARES support
systems take
ownership of new
tools.
Economic and
environmental
conditions allow
improved
technologies to
succeed.
Research data and
publications.
 Number of links made to
regional, national and/or
global markets.
 Farm/household income
increased.
 Livelihood study and
stakeholder analysis.
 Benchmark
SREP.WUAs, SHGs,
FIGs, FAs, Producer’s
groups
Sub
Outputs
and
Activities
Output 1.1 Feasible and sustainable policy recommendations for the benchmark sites developed.
1.1.1 Develop and implement a strategic policy plan for the benchmark sites.
1.1.2 Policy analysis and support provided to key institutions, by ICARDA, IWMI and US universities.
1.1.3 Validated policy recommendations extended to national and provincial governments regarding
integration including the recommended technologies and management practices disseminated at
farm, community and watershed level.
Output 1.2 Enhanced extension system for the dissemination of sustainable water and land use practices
and livelihood strategies.
1.2.1 Develop working partnerships for improved institutional collaboration between key NARES, CGIAR
Centers, regional and national universities and US universities.
1.2.2 Strengthen key selected NARES and create links between national and provincial agricultural
research and extension organizations, extension workers and farmers for enhanced and targeted
information dissemination.
1.2.3 Facilitate reorientation of existing national extension systems to decentralized, participatory and
market-driven extension approach.
Output 1.3:Development of tools and structures for the effective implementation of the WLI
1.3.1 Development of WLI portal for knowledge sharing and training.
1.3.2 Hiring of key staff for the project management unit in ICARDA, the project manager and WLI
training coordinator.
1.3.3 Initiate knowledge sharing plans.
1.3.4 Develop monitoring and evaluation system.
1.3.5 Develop scaling-up plans for the benchmark sites.
49
Output 1.4 Integrated watershed decision support models developed according to specific identified
priorities in each participating country.
1.4.1 Model assessment, verification and selection.
1.4.2 Baseline study for model selection and M&E
1.4.3 Baseline analysis including uncertainty and risk analysis
1.4.4 Benchmark development including study findings
1.4.5 Develop and test model with relevant stakeholders
1.4.6 Test decision-support capability of model
1.4.7 Conduct analysis of relevant policies
1.4.8 Identify feasible changes to existing policies and strategies.
Output 1.5 Creation of enabling environment and SAG for stakeholder participation and inclusion in
strategy and development at the benchmark site.
1.5.1 Carry out stakeholder analysis of the benchmark site identifying key partners at all levels for
inclusion of the SAG.
1.5.2 Formation of the SAG.
1.5.3 Establish the position and role of the SAG within the WLI implementation structure and facilitate
two-way flows of information and strategy decision.
1.5.4. Publicize the goal and aims of the WLI to community stakeholders and initiate coordination with the
NARES and regional government to ensure an enabling environment for the development of
community organizations, FIGs, FAs, SHGs and producer groups.
Output 2.1. Agreed training and e-learning plan developed for and carried out at the benchmark site.
2.1.1 Establishment of the e-learning committee.
2.1.2 Carry out the needs and resource matching exercise through the WLI portal and with the WLI
Training Coordinator.
2.1.3 Develop benchmark training plan including the allocation of postgraduate degrees and priority
stakeholders for short course and train the trainer input.
2.1.4 Conduct training needs assessment and develop curricula for key stakeholders on the community
level.
2.1.5 Tender out English language, computer and study skills and the development or adaptation of any
new e-learning materials to regional institutions, universities and US universities.
2.1.6 Develop the infrastructure and capacity of national universities, regional universities and ICARDA
to accommodate the e-learning.
2.1.7 Enrol and commence relevant post-graduate degree programs for NARES staff, managers and other
relevant stakeholders.
Output 2.2 Trained benchmark technical teams.
2.2.1 Identify key members of the benchmark technical teams and conduct training needs assessment.
2.2.2 Carry out train the trainer courses in PRA, SWOT other relevant participatory techniques and
extension.
Output 2.3 Dissemination of aggregated knowledge and public goods to a broader group of stakeholders
at the benchmark sites, nationally and regionally between participating WLI countries.
2.3.1 Develop knowledge sharing plan.
2.3.2 Develop, aggregate and adapt, training and research outputs; materials, research papers, case studies
and reviews for publication and sharing on the WLI portal, other websites and in printed media.
2.3.3 Hold regional and national conferences, workshops and knowledge sharing forums between all
trained stakeholders at all levels to build strategy, induct participants to international and ensure the
dissemination of knowledge and skills as public goods.
2.3.4 Enrol relevant stakeholders in non WLI affiliated international conferences and workshops held in
the region and internationally for induction to a wider perspective and current international research
and extension methods and standards and dissemination of WLI outputs to a wider audience.
50
Output 3.1 Sustainable locally appropriate water and land use technologies identified and tested for
development and dissemination.
3.1.1 Introduce identified and tested water-use management technologies for immediate dissemination and
use by farmers.
3.1.2 Develop a scaling up strategy for the benchmark sites.
3.1.3 Ensure dissemination of methods alongside crop /livelihood technologies for income generation to
encourage adoption.
3.1.4 Increase the capacity of local communities to manage water resource allocation and use through the
formulation of WUAs.
3.1.5 Empirically document that water and land use strategies in the benchmark sites have been improved.
Output 3.2 Livelihood study and stakeholder analysis undertaken and Strategic Research and Extension
Plan developed for the benchmark sites.
3.2.1 Conduct livelihood study and stakeholder analysis.
3.2.2 Develop SREP for the benchmark sites.
3.2.3 Identify constraints to implementing identified improved crop/livestock technologies and market
development.
Output 3.3 Implementation of improved livelihood strategies.
3.3.1 Test, refine adapt and disseminate water efficient crop/livestock strategies to farm households
through on-farm trials and demonstrations.
3.3.2 Organize farmers and farm women interested in producing and marketing water efficient
crops/products into Farmer Interest Groups or Producer Groups.
3.3.3 Conduct exposure visits for FIGs and FAs.
3.3.4 Facilitate contracts and agreements between FIGs and buyers.
3.3.5 Conduct targeted training for producer groups.
3.3.6 Facilitate inputs in the inception.
3.3.7 Produce crop or product to specification.
3.3.8 Harvest handle and deliver crop/product.
3.3.9 Empirically document that rural livelihoods in the benchmark site have been improved.
51
Appendix 3: US Universities Comparative Research Advantage,
Specializations and Middle East Experience
Table 11: Comparative Research Advantage, Specializations and Middle East Experience
University and
Key Area of Comparative
Further Key
Experience
Acronym
Advantage
Specialization
-- Range management
--Project development and Iraq
Texas A&M
-- Livestock production,
management in Iraq
University
management, health, and value
--Crop modelling
(TAMU)
addition.
--Agribusiness
-- Value chain development and
--Agricultural Education
mgt.
and Ext.
-Production,
post-harvest
--Cooperative
Extension
Egypt
University of
handling, processing and
--Diversification with HV
Iraq
California at Davis
marketing of horticultural
crops
(UCD) and
products.
--International Learning
Riverside (UCR)
-- UC Center for Water Resources
Center
(Salinity)
--Development of FIGs &
Egypt
University of Illinois -- Agricultural Marketing
-- Decision-support modelling
SHGs
Jordan
at Urbana--Water purification for
Palestine
Champaign (UIUC) -- Demand driven agricultural
extension
small water treatment
Syria
units
--Drought monitoring
-- Gender
--Develop and promote the Egypt
University of
-- Participatory Innovation
adoption of improved
Iraq
Florida (UF)
Development
methodologies for water
Jordan
-- Extension
management and policy
Syria
--GIS, decision-support, and
(including quantity,
Palestine
scenario modelling
quality, and ecosystem
--Climate models
services)
--Distance education
--Organic agriculture
--Water Institute
--High value crops
-- All irrigation subjects including
--Water quality
Egypt
Utah State
salinity
management
Iraq
University (USU)
-- River basin and watershed
--Legal and institutional
Jordan
planning and management
reforms for integrated
Palestine
-- Surface and ground water
water resource
hydrology and management for
management
optimal use
--Water users associations
--Economic and social
IWRM risk assessment
--IWRM development
-- Platform in Middle East and full --Up-scaling benchmark
Egypt
CGIAR Centers
suite of research programs
studies to national policy Iraq
(ICARDA, IFPRI,
-- Treated wastewater and bio--Economic analysis
Jordan
IWMI)
solids reuse and integrated water --Impact analysis
Lebanon
resource management
Palestine
-- Productivity enhancement of
Syria
salt-affected lands
Yemen
52