1. CGIAR Research Programmes (CRPs): CATIE’s experience

2. CATIE already has strong links to the CGIAR: 1)Hosts a regional (Central America) office of Bioversity since over 10 years (previously INIBAP) 2)ICRAF staff member seconded to CATIE en 2011 with CRP 6.1 as a main focus 3)ILRI staff member “hosted” in CATIE 4)CIFOR staff seconded to CATIE in the past/ some CATIE staff are “associate” CIFOR scientists 5)Past and ongoing agreements and joint projects with CIAT, ICRAF and CIFOR

3. CATIE has participated (on-line discussions; review of proposals; workshops) in the development of several CGIAR Research Programmes (CRPs): 1)CRP 1.2 “Integrated Systems for the Humid Tropics” 2)CRP 2 “Policies, Institutions & Markets….”. 3)CRP 3.7 [livestock] 4)CRP 6 “Forests, Trees and Agroforestry:…” 5)CRP 7 “Climate Change, Agriculture and Food security”

4. Example. Our strongest participation is in CRP 6: “Forests, Trees and Agroforestry” 1)Regional (Latin America) workshop planned for May 2012 in CATIE respect components CRP 6.1 “Farm”; CRP 6.3 “Territory”; maybe also CRP 3.7 (livestock) 2)Participation in Sentinel Landscape workshop CIFOR 2011 3)Participation in planning workshop CRP 6.2 (“Forests”) March 2012 4)Possible Central American coordinating role

5. Mesoamerican Agroenvironmental Programme (MAP) as a possible platform for CRPs in Central America: 1)CRP 6. Discussion about the potential for forest and agroforestry R+D in the MAP Key Territory “Bosawas” (biosphere reserve) in Northern Nicaragua. The Latin American Model Forest Network (coordination CATIE) has also been identified a potential framework (pilot zones) 2)CRP 3.7. Dairy value chain R+D, focused on Central and Northern Nicaragua (confirmed), coincides with the Bosawas Key Territory of the MAP 3)CRP 1.2. Interest in MAP Key Territory “Trifinio” (also a biosphere reserve). 4)CRP 7. Central America chosen as third “Key Region” (confirmed?); overlaps with the whole MAP region

7. Despite the long term close collaboration that CATIE has had with the CGIAR, there are outstanding questions respect CATIE’s involvement in CRPs: 1)As a research partner, development pathway or both? 2)Counter-part funding; who levers who? 3)Independence of partners to plan and manage their own resources in a shared “target region”? 4)Sentinel Landscapes (CRP 6): intervention or only observation (research vs development or research for development)? 5)Incremental costs for external partner’s (to CGIAR); participation in a CRP covered by who and how? 6)Impact pathways designed and selected (geographical/ thematic) by partners or CGIAR?

8. Key words: 1)Knowledge management? 2)Livelihoods/ value chains 3)*Policy Impact 4)*Education and Capacity building 5)*Partners for development (true partners) 6)*Integrated approaches 7)Applied science 8)*Regional Platforms 9)*Convening function for regional networks 10)**Ownership by countries 11)*Research and development key impact pathways 12)*High value crops/ nutrition/ health 13)Focus on people/ not commodities 14)*Non-traditional (export and perennial crops) 15)Dissemination 16)*Outscaling and upscaling….research into the real world

9. Flexibility in biocontrol systems not single crop orientation…Invasives! Looking at development end of the R and D spectrum Public-private partnerships to be encouraged and high value commodities fit well: Bamboo, coffee, cocoa, palms, salt-tolerant crops, vegetables and fruit More entrepreneurial ability in the real world Dietary contributions to better human health and nutrition and winning the war against malnutrition…..coping with obesity and NCDs Pro-poor specialty crops Non-conventional biological resources Importance of fertilizer, soil health and crop and human nutrition Preventing food losses helps in sustainable intensification Biodiversity, gender and partnerships lost in CRP discussion Outcome orientation of research process Knowledge management and encouraging and facilitating application by partners Ownership by regions now to be desired for impact Willingness to address niche ecosystem problems in globally vulnerable areas High quality and broad spectrum capacity building within partner organizations and connected to generation of knowledge, knowledge into action and outcome generation Fringe? or Mainstream Benefits from AIRCA Proportionate level of engagement