Presented by Ann Waters-Bayer (ETC Foundation) and Wolfgang Bayer (Agrecol Association) at Tropentag 2014: Bridging the gap between increasing knowledge and decreasing resources, Prague, 17−19 September 2014

1. Supporting development processes through
livestock innovation systems research
Ann Waters-Bayer (ETC Foundation) and
Wolfgang Bayer (Agrecol Association)
Tropentag 2014: Bridging the gap between increasing
knowledge and decreasing resources, Prague, 17−19 September
2014

2. ILCA started with livestock systems research (LSR)
1972 Tribe report: role of new
research centre ILCA
• Integrate sociological, economic &
biological research & development
related to livestock in Africa
• Study existing livestock systems to
understand why people do what they do
• Examine responses of traditional
systems to development interventions
• Test potential improvements to see
what worked and how livestock-keepers
adapted the ideas
• Research in smallholders’ reality

3. LSR: an approach that needed to mature
At that time:
• More multi- than inter-disciplinary
• Focus on production (less on processing and marketing)
• Focus on biological and technical aspects
(less on sociopolitical and institutional)

4. ILCA results relevant for development
• Explanation of rationale behind existing practices helped to
re-orient development
• Research methodology for understanding and improving
existing livestock systems
• Key contextual information on livestock systems in different
ecological zones in Africa
• Overviews of specific aspects of livestock systems central not
to Western science but to African farmers, e.g. browse
• Increased capability of researchers to think in systems terms
& to see what type of research is relevant for development

5. Battling a paradigm of linearity, simplification
& disciplinarity
Mid-80s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) advice:
• Do component research on animal health, nutrition & genetics
• Technical opportunities in drylands “too little to warrant a major
research effort”
• Focus remaining systems research on mixed crop-livestock farming
Pressure from conventional Science did not allow innovative,
complex and challenging LSR to mature
Social scientists – except economists – dropped
Merger ILCA + ILRAD = ILRI: clashing of cultures (upstream vs
field-based) meant setback for systems-oriented research

6. But still some outcomes relevant for
livestock systems development
For example:
• Characterisation of indigenous
livestock breeds confirmed
their value in prevailing systems
• Networks on livestock policy,
forage, small ruminants etc
helped inform scientists and
development practitioners
worldwide

7. Renewed attention to development impact
in livestock innovation systems
2002: New era with new Director General
• Strong senior management support for work with development
partners with more explicit focus on poverty reduction
• Work in drylands recommenced
• A few more social scientists
• New theme: Enabling Innovation
– enhancing adaptive capacity
“on the move”
• 2007: Innovation Works Unit
set up multi-stakeholder
co-learning platforms

8. Some roles of ILRI in innovation systems research
through transdisciplinary partnerships in CRPs
• Developing & testing mechanisms to enhance
joint learning & action in livestock-related
innovation
• Contributing relevant scientific findings to IPs
• Engaging in place-based participatory research
to enhance innovation capacities
• Synthesising lessons for policymakers and
engaging in policy dialogue
• Generating information & learning to empower
women in livestock innovation

9. Highlight on …
Policy
• Early recognition that
livestock policy important:
Policy Unit since 1982
• Influenced policy towards
pro-poor development
• Example: Kenya
milk-marketing
policy to support
informal sector
Gender
• Early recognition of women’s
key roles: most resource-poor
livestock-keepers are women
• Ongoing campaign to keep
gender issues at forefront of
livestock
research &
development

10. Some results of ILRI’s innovation systems
research
• Improved communication & collaboration leading to better access
of smallholders to input & output markets (value chain IPs)
• Enhanced capacity to innovate in forage husbandry in different
ecological & institutional settings
• Policy influence related
to food safety in milk &
meat markets
• Much greater awareness
of gender issues and of
impact of technologies &
policies on women

11. Conclusions and outlook
ILRI can contribute hugely to improving the livelihoods of poor
people by scaling up transdisciplinary research in the midst of
development action