Building multi-stakeholder processes in agricultural research for development in Burundi

Abstract

After staring at his computer screen for 30 minutes and unconsciously listening to the sounds of political unrest in the streets of Bujumbura, Burundi’s national facilitator of Humidtropics still had not written a single word for his May 2015 monthly report. He turned his chair and looked through the window, but his mind was somewhere else. It was in the Highlands of Gitega, with the research for development activities that had been implemented half-a-year ago and with the farmers hosting these and awaiting him to give guidance. He thought back to the many signs of success and lessons learned that he had experienced during the last months. The fragile political situation in Burundi had somewhat disrupted the multi-stakeholder process, and, despite their efforts and well thought out action plans, most field activities had been postponed during this month…

But no – he thought to himself – this was not how it was going to be. He was not going to sit back when things were finally taking shape. He was going to fight! And with this thought, the national facilitator turned back his chair to his computer screen and wrote just seven words on the document called ‘Monthly updates for Humidtropics Burundi, May 2015’: “We had the courage to go on.”

Full text

1
CASE STUDY
BURUNDI
Building multi-stakeholder
processes in agricultural research
for development in Burundi

Please refer to this case study as:
Lamers, D., C. Hicintuka, A. Nibasumba, J-P. Kanyaruguru, B. van Scha-
gen, E. Njukwe, C. Okafor, M. Sartas and M. Schut (2015). Building
multi-stakeholder processes in agricultural research for development in Bu-
rundi. Case study developed under the CGIAR Research Program on In-
tegrated Systems for the Humid Tropics (Humidtropics) by Wageningen
University (WUR) and the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture
(IITA), October 2015.
Photography cover: Doublearc. Doublearc grants anyone the right to use
this work for any purpose, without any conditions.
Other photography by Dieuwke Lamers, Marc Schut and Jean Prosper
Kanyaruguru.

After staring at his computer screen for 30 minutes and unconsciously
listening to the sounds of political unrest in the streets of Bujumbura,
Burundi’s national facilitator of Humidtropics still had not written a single
word for his May 2015 monthly report. He turned his chair and looked
through the window, but his mind was somewhere else. It was in the
Highlands of Gitega, with the research for development activities that had
been implemented half-a-year ago and with the farmers hosting these and
awaiting him to give guidance. He thought back to the many signs of success
and lessons learned that he had experienced during the last months. The
fragile political situation in Burundi had somewhat disrupted the multi-
stakeholder process, and, despite their efforts and well thought out action
plans, most field activities had been postponed during this month…
But no – he thought to himself – this was not how it was going to be. He
was not going to sit back when things were finally taking shape. He was
going to fight! And with this thought, the national facilitator turned back his
chair to his computer screen and wrote just seven words on the document
called ‘Monthly updates for Humidtropics Burundi, May 2015’:
“We had the courage to go on.”
Dieuwke Lamers, Cyrille Hicintuka, Anaclet Nibasumba,
Jean Prosper Kanyaruguru, Boudy van Schagen, Emmanuel Njukwe,
Chris Okafor, Murat Sartas and Marc Schut
October 2015
Building multi-stakeholder
processes in agricultural
research for development
in Burundi

Acknowledgements
These case studies were developed under the framework of the Consortium for Im-
proving Agricultural Livelihoods in Central Africa (CIALCA) which is funded by the
Belgian Directorate General of Development Cooperation (DGDC). CIALCA forms
part of the CGIAR Research Program on Integrated Systems for the Humid Tropics
(Humidtropics).
We would like to acknowledge Humidtropics and the CGIAR Fund Donors for their
provision of core funding without which this research could not deliver results that
eventually positively impact the lives of millions of smallholder farmers in tropical
Americas, Asia and Africa. For a list of Fund donors please see: www.cgiar.org/who-
we-are/cgiar-fund/fund-donors-2
In addition, throughout the process of data collection for, and the writing of, this
case study, many people have given valuable contributions. Without them, develop-
ing this case study would not have been possible, and therefore we want to express
our sincere gratitude to them.
First, we want to thank all interviewees for their time and openness when talking
about the multi-stakeholder process as they experienced it. Second, we want to thank
the people who participated in Humidtropics events and took photographs during
platform meetings and other activities. Third, we want to thank Catherine O’Dea
for her profound and sharp language editing and Luc Dinnissen who gave this case
study an attractive design.
Humidtropics, a CGIAR Research Program led by IITA, seeks to transform the lives of
the rural poor in tropical America, Asia and Africa. Research organisations involved
in core partnership with Humidtropics are AVRDC, Bioversity International, CIAT,
CIP, FARA, icipe, ICRAF, ILRI, IITA, IWMI and WUR.
humidtropics.cgiar.org
Published by Humidtropics
October 2015. This document is licensed for use under a Creative Commons Attribu-
tion-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported Licence

1
Humidtropics, a program
for impactful research for development
CGIAR is a worldwide partnership addressing agricultural research
for development (R4D), whose work contributes to the global
effort to tackle poverty, hunger and major nutrition imbalances,
and environmental degradation. The CGIAR Research Program on
Integrated Systems for the Humid Tropics (Humidtropics) is led by
the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) and aims
to improve the livelihoods of the rural poor living in (sub)tropical
areas in sub-Saharan Africa, Central America and the Caribbean,
and Asia. An important intervention strategy in Humidtropics is the
strengthening of multi-stakeholder collaboration and partnerships to
achieve development impact at scale. To achieve this, Humidtropics
supports local level innovation platforms (IPs) in its Field Sites that
experiment with various technological and institutional innovations
aiming to tackle site-specific constraints. In addition, Humidtropics
supports R4D platforms at (sub-)national level that bring on board
the key scaling actors in the agricultural system and that form the link
between local and national level. Innovations that are successfully
tested in the IPs are intended to be scaled up by the R4D platform to
generate impact on a larger scale (Humidtropics, 2012).
But why go to all this trouble to bring together researchers, farmers,
policymakers, the private sector, extension workers and NGOs in
IPs and R4D platforms? This approach is rooted in the belief that
encouraging multi-stakeholder interaction and collaboration can
foster engagement, ownership and demand-driven R4D that is better
tailored to the needs and realities of farmers and other stakeholders.
Consequently, this approach will lead to development impact and
outcomes (Humidtropics, 2012).
Humidtropics adopts an integrated systems perspective. Instead of
targeting one single pre-selected commodity and trying to boost its
productivity at farm level, Humidtropics focuses on stimulating pro-
ductivity, natural resource management (NRM) and institutional in-
novations across different levels in order to achieve more sustainable
impacts. It considers all farm enterprises and their interactions, as
well as nutrition, social differentiation (e.g. gender and youth), and
policy and markets (Humidtropics, 2012).
In November 2012, Humidtropics started activities in the West African
Humid Lowlands, the East and Central African Highlands, Central
America and the Caribbean, and the Central Mekong – all of which are
referred to as Action Areas or Flagships. Initially, a variety of planning
and capacity building workshops were organised for key actors from

2
the participating countries (referred to as Action Sites) to coordinate
activities and build their expertise and knowledge on facilitating the
multi-stakeholder processes and systems-oriented R4D.
This case study zooms in on multi-stakeholder processes in the East
and Central Africa (ECA) Action Area or Flagship that were launched
on 20 May 2013 in Bukavu, DR Congo. The ECA Flagship encompasses
the Rwanda, DR Congo, Burundi, Uganda, Kenya and Ethiopia Action
Sites. More specifically, the case study describes and reflects upon the
first two years of Humidtropics in Burundi (Box 1), aiming to outline
the multi-stakeholder process as it unfolded and highlighting lessons
that can be learned from this. In Burundi, activities are mainly taking
place in Gitega (also referred to as a Field Site), a province in the
Central Highlands of the country. The case study is based on meeting
minutes, progress reports, event documentation, four individual
and two focus-group semi-structured interviews. Furthermore, data
originate from an IP and an R4D platform reflection meeting, and
participatory observation by the authors. Some interview quotes used
in this case study have been slightly edited to enhance readibility.
BOX 1 Burundi’s biophysical, demographic and institutional context
Burundi is a relatively small, resource-poor and landlocked country with a hilly landscape
that drops into a plateau in the east. It covers 25,680km2 of land and has an average
altitude of 1,700m (varying between 772m and 2,670m). Annual average temperatures
vary between 23°C and 17°C, with an average annual rainfall of 150cm and two rainy
seasons (February to May and September to November). Major environmental challenges
are soil erosion (caused by overgrazing and agricultural expansion to marginal lands),
deforestation (caused by tree cutting for fuel) and wildlife losing habitat. In 2014, 11.8% of
the over 10 million people living in Burundi (median age 17 years) lived in the urban areas
and, in 2002, 68% of its population was estimated to live below the poverty line. At that
time, agriculture accounted for 93.6% of employment (CIA, 2015).
Burundi has a history of conflict that continued until 2005 and claimed the lives of more than
200,000 people. After 2005, the country began a period of recovery and reconstruction and
experienced an annual GDP growth of about 4% in the period 2006 to 2014. Nevertheless,
challenges like government corruption, low administrative capacity, a weak legal system,
poor education systems, high poverty and limited transportation infrastructure continue
to hamper genuine development. Also, the availability of food, medicine and electricity
remains constrained. Currently, about 42% of Burundi’s national income comes from
foreign aid, making it highly dependent on external donors (CIA, 2015). In 2015, political
unrest again became an issue in Burundi. Consequently, many people fled the country and
several donors withdrew their development aid.
FIGURE 1 Map of Gitega.
PHOTO 1 R4D trial in Gitega.

3
The Humidtropics Burundi Field Site encompasses Carire and Murayi Communes in
Gitega Province (Photo 1 and Figure 1). The communes are located close to Burundi’s
second largest city, Gitega, and are part of the Central Highlands. The Central Highlands
region is a densely populated area with an average temperature of 18°C and large and
sometimes swampy marshes. The natural vegetation in the region has mostly disappeared,
and overexploitation, soil erosion and poor farming practices are gradually reducing soil
fertility on the hills. A major challenge in the region is the acidic nature of the soil, which
also increases acidity in the marshes due to erosion of acid alluvium.
How multi-stakeholder processes in Burundi
contribute to achieving Humidtropics’
intermediate development outcomes (IDOs)
IDO 1: Increase income for rural households
“Livestock production and higher crop yields for farmers provide
opportunities for increased household income.”
IDO 2: Better nutrition for rural households
“Integrating pigs and nutritious crops like legumes and tree
tomato in banana, cassava and maize cropping systems
contributes to improved nutrition.”
IDO 3: Increase farm productivity
“Participatory testing of various potato and yam bean varieties
helps farmers select those that are most productive.”
IDO 4: Sustainable natural resource management
“Pig manure adds nutrients to farm fields, and animals are fed
with crop residues and feed crops that simultaneously control soil
erosion.”
IDO 5: Empowered women and youth
“Surveys and focus group discussions are leading to better
understanding about the gender implications of introducing pigs.”
IDO 6: Enhanced innovation capacity
“Lack of veterinary services made farmers and researchers discuss
innovative options for jointly setting up a sustainable pig medicine
supply system.”

4
The initiation of the multi-stakeholder process in
Burundi
Launching the program and deciding where to work
To support the multi-stakeholder process in Burundi, the national
research institute ISABU (Institut des Sciences Agronomiques du Bu-
rundi) was requested to act as the facilitating organisation. ISABU
had previously partnered with the CGIAR centres in Burundi under
the CIALCA1 program that had supported partnerships to coordinate
activities and stimulate demand-driven research. With the aim of
building on existing collaboration and activities, it was decided to
re-engage with former CIALCA partners, including ISABU. Within IS-
ABU, a soil scientist and former Minister of Education was the per-
son designated to execute the role of national facilitator (also referred
to as Action Site Facilitator – ASF). Over time, he was assisted in this
role by colleagues from ISABU, researchers from IITA and Bioversity
International, representatives of the NGOs Reseau Burundi 2000+
(RB2000+) and Floresta, two extension officers and two farmers. In
different compositions, these people formed the team that facilitated
the multi-stakeholder processes in Burundi.
The official launch of Humidtropics in Burundi took place on 2 and
3 July 2013 in Bujumbura, Burundi’s capital, and brought together
69 participants representing a wide variety of stakeholder groups.
Research organisations, government officials, NGOs, agri-business
people, financial institutions, women’s organisations and journalists
participated, most of whom were from Bujumbura. The workshop
started with presentations about Humidtropics and four previously
identified potential Field Sites that represented the major agro-eco-
logical zones in Burundi and gender and agriculture in Burundi. Sub-
sequently, participants split up into groups relating to the proposed
Field Sites and started brainstorming about challenges, opportuni-
ties and activities going on there. From this, they developed a list
of potential Entry Themes for each site in relation to the different
objectives of the program, and they prioritised the four most im-
portant Entry Themes. The group decided to start activities in the
Central Highlands (Plateaux Centraux). Finally, the national facilitator
presented the tasks of the R4D platform and next steps were agreed
1 The Consortium for the Improvement of Agriculture-based Livelihoods in Central Africa
(CIALCA) is an agricultural research for development program that has been active since
2006 in the Great Lakes region, including Rwanda. It is currently led by the CGIAR centres
IITA and Bioversity International in collaboration with national research institutes. CIALCA
initially focused on improving productivity of legume- and banana-based systems to enhan-
ce income, nutrition and environment, and in 2011 it expanded thematically – increasing
its focus on farming systems, livestock integration, climate change, multi-stakeholder col-
laborations and understanding drivers of impact. At that point, CIALCA agreed to partner
with Humidtropics to work on R4D activities targeting banana, cassava, seed systems and
markets, irrespective of location.
PHOTO 2 Group photo Humidtropics
launch meeting in Gitega.

5
upon. These included among other things that issues discussed
during the workshop would be verified and finalised afterwards and
a coordination committee would be strengthened into the national
R4D platform.
Two months later, on 3 September 2013, a Field Site launch meet-
ing was organised in the Central Highlands, bringing together sim-
ilar stakeholders as in July but this time more of them coming from
Gitega (Photo 2). Again the meeting started with presentations
(about Humidtropics, its launch in July, innovation platforms, sites
and Entry Themes selected), followed by discussing, verifying and
replacing some of the sites selected and implementation strategies
(potential partners) discussed in the Bujumbura launch. Then, partic-
ipants started identifying major cropping systems, their advantages,
their constraints and potential field activities relating to these, which
would feed into the development of concrete R4D activities for the
Central Highlands later on. The next steps agreed upon included the
initiation of a local level platform in the Central Highlands (a repre-
sentative from RB2000+ was selected as local facilitator) and regular
committee meetings for follow-up and guidance. Overall, ideas and
potential field activities discussed during this second launch were
very general and remained to be finalised later on.
In the period following the launch workshops, many small meetings
were conducted involving the national facilitator and the small group
surrounding him. The group was assisted by the IP facilitator and a
university professor in Gitega. During their meetings, these people
followed up on issues discussed in the launch workshops and talked
about how to organise and what to do with regard to establishing
platforms, selecting sites and possible field activities. According to
the IP facilitator, his main role was to sensitise farmers about Humid-
tropics and interact with them to collect more information on which
sites, major agricultural systems and constraints/problems Humid-
tropics could address. For this, he first talked to community leaders
and extension services and afterwards invited farmers to discuss this
again.
The collective efforts from the launch workshops and follow-up meet-
ings led to the formulation of the major challenges and Entry Themes
on which to work (Table 1).

6
Concretising demand-driven and systems-oriented research themes
Despite these efforts, the Entry Themes were not very concrete.
Hence, a Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems (RAAIS
- Schut et al., 2015; Box 2) workshop was organised on 26 February
2014 in Gitega, to further refine and clarify the Entry Themes. During
the workshop, constraints and challenges of different stakeholder
groups were analysed, and more concrete Entry Points for productivi-
ty, NRM and institutional innovation were identified to sustainably in-
tensify the agricultural system in Burundi (Schut and Hinnou, 2014).
BOX 2 Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems (RAAIS)
RAAIS is a diagnostic tool for integrated analysis of complex agricultural problems and
innovation capacity. RAAIS workshops facilitate different stakeholder groups (farmers, the
private sector, NGOs, government and research) to systematically identify their constraints
and opportunities for innovation to address complex agricultural problems. Participants
analyse these constraints and opportunities with regard to different problem dimensions
(biophysical, technological, socio-cultural, economic, institutional and political) and
different levels (national, regional, local) and subsequently prioritise them. In this way,
participants jointly create an abstract representation of the agricultural system that
provides a comprehensive basis for selecting context-specific Entry Points for sustainable
intensification. Key to RAAIS is that it increases awareness of how stakeholders’ challenges
are interrelated and require collective action and also that the process is both visual and
interactive. Using large sheets of paper, tables and coloured cards, stakeholders literally
group around the problems they identify and discuss their various options to resolve these
(Schut et al., 2015).
Major challenges Entry Themes
1. Cultivated crop varieties are susceptible, low yielding and
of limited nutrition and market value
1. Introduction, evaluation and dissemination of improved
varieties (e.g. high yield, nutritious, pest and disease
resistant) adapted to farmer production systems and
improving their market value
2. Cropping systems are often inappropriate and there is
limited knowledge on integrated farming systems
2. Integration of agroforestry and livestock into farming
systems for sustainable intensification and improvement
of agro-ecological integrity
3. Continuous cropping on small farm sizes due to high
population density, resulting in highly degraded soils
3. Improvement of NRM and soil fertility through the
introduction, evaluation and dissemination of innovative
technologies
4. Farmers have limited savings to reinvest in agriculture
and need credit facilities
4. Provision of innovative solutions for farmers’ access to
financial services and credit to intensify production and
increase market opportunities
TABLE 1 Major challenges and
corresponding Entry Themes.

7
In total, 24 people participated; they more or less equally represent-
ed the different stakeholder groups but were predominately men (19
males versus five females) (Photo 3). These participants were first
asked to individually list their Top 5 challenges and constraints relat-
ing to the Entry Themes and later to repeat this exercise in homoge-
neous stakeholder groups. Finally, all participants decided together
on the most important constraints in relation to productivity re-
search, NRM research and institutional research, and these became
the Entry Points for the R4D activities in Gitega. In general, the ma-
jority of constraints mentioned by stakeholders were institutional in
nature (Schut and Hinnou, 2014) (Table 2).
In the period following RAAIS and preceding the establishment of the
platforms, several capacity development activities were organised at
ECA Flagship level for key people working in Humidtropics (e.g. the
national facilitators). The objective of these activities was to increase
these people’s understanding of the R4D approach and strengthen
their capacities to facilitate multi-stakeholder processes.
“Here [the launch workshops] it was very global,
but with RAAIS it was clear. (…) We came up with many
constraints, many solutions and what to do, with farmers. (…)
I can say that what we have done here [the IP launch], it
was okay, but what we are doing now, comes from RAAIS.”
National facilitator (8 March 2015)
Establishing a national level research for development platform
Preceding the R4D platform launch meeting, the national facilita-
tor together with IITA staff talked about who best to invite for the
meeting. Criteria were based on the different stakeholder groups they
wanted to have on board and the input individual representatives of
these groups could give to the platform. According to the national
facilitator, the identified people were contacted in advance to explain
Humidtropics, ascertain their willingness to participate and give rea-
sons as to why these potential participants should come to the meet-
ing.
The R4D platform launch meeting took place on 24 June 2014 at
Kaddesh conference hall in Bujumbura and brought together 14 par-
ticipants, most of whom represented research organisations and the
remainder government, NGOs or financial organisations (Photo 4).
The meeting started with an explanation of, among other things, the
Humidtropics philosophy (humidtropics.cgiar.org/impact-pathway)
and modus operandi, its objectives, the multi-stakeholder platform
PHOTO 4 Group photo R4D platform
launch 24 June 2014: the 14
participants and the national
facilitator.
PHOTO 3 RAAIS Burundi 24 February
2014.

8
concept and the top constraints of the different stakeholders as iden-
tified during RAAIS. Next, the R4D platform discussed and defined
some R4D activities that could be implemented in the upcoming
planting seasons, including who could assist in this.
Some stakeholders who were invited for the R4D platform launch
meeting but were unable to attend were contacted again later on and
became platform members in a later phase of the process.
Establishing a local level innovation platform
On the day following the R4D platform launch, the local level IP was
established in Murayi Commune (Photo 5). Just as with the R4D plat-
form, potential IP members were carefully selected and contacted in
advance – this time with the help of a local extension officer. Then,
on the day of the IP launch, Humidtropics, the Field Sites selected in-
cluding the reasoning behind this, and the roles and responsibilities
of the IP (and briefly of the R4D platform) were explained. Next, mo-
tivational speeches were given as well as presentations about major
challenges in the region and potential solutions. Then, participants
were asked to rank the occurrence of different crops according to
planting seasons, indicate their livestock preferences and list the kind
of cropping systems cultivated in Carire and Murayi Communes. In
general, the cropping systems mentioned by the IP overlapped with
those mentioned by the R4D platform but, according to participants,
were not considered very innovative. It was decided that the IP would
continue discussing more innovative cropping systems later on.
How the process continued
After the first period of big launch meetings and additional prepara-
tion and follow-up work in smaller groups, the R4D platform and the
IP in Burundi finally became operational. Hence, activities began to
be channelled through these platforms, and implementation of on-
PHOTO 5 Group photo IP platform
launch 25 June 2014.
Productivity NRM Institutional
1. Little knowhow of agricultural
production techniques
1. Poor soil fertility 1. Lack of material and financial
resources
2. High pressure of diseases and pests
(for crops and livestock)
2. Acidity and scarcity of agricultural
land
2. Lack of adequate sensitisation of the
population to the adoption of innova-
tion practices
3. Insufficient improved varieties/
breeds in the crop–livestock system
3. Absence of agricultural credit policies
to motivate the private sector to
invest
TABLE 2 Prioritised constraints
under the different categories of
innovation required
.

9
farm R4D activities began. An overview of the process is presented
in Box 3.
BOX 3 Overview of R4D events under Humidtropics Burundi
2-3 July 2013
Launch meeting Humidtropics in Bujumbura. Presentations are given about Humidtropics,
the four Field Sites identified, and gender and agriculture in Burundi. Then, participants
brainstorm in groups about challenges, opportunities and activities going on in these sites,
and make a list of potential Entry Themes. Finally, they rank the sites and decide to start
activities in the Central Highlands.
3 September 2013
Launch meeting Humidtropics in Gitega. Presentations are given about Humidtropics, IPs,
the Bujumbura launch, and Entry Themes and Field Sites selected. Then, participants dis-
cuss Field Sites and partners as identified in the first launch meeting and change some of
these, followed by discussion of major cropping systems in the Central Highlands and their
advantages and challenges.
July 2013-February 2014
Facilitation team meets frequently (first national facilitator and CGIAR researchers, later
more people become active) to discuss how to implement the program, establish platforms
and verify Field Sites selected and possible field activities. Also, they sensitise farmers and
follow up agreed activities.
26 February 2014
RAAIS workshop conducted in Gitega to identify priority constraints and Entry Points for
innovation to sustainably intensify the agricultural system in Burundi.
24 June 2014
R4D platform launch meeting. The program, the platform concept, the platform’s and
members’ responsibilities and the outcomes of RAAIS are explained; then participants de-
termine cropping systems on which to work in the Field Site.
25 June 2014
IP launch meeting in Gitega. The program, the IP, the platform’s and members’ respon-
sibilities, major constraints and opportunities in the region are explained and potential
solutions are suggested. Next, IP members rate cropping systems by area and season.
4 August 2014
R4D platform meeting to define action plans for R4D activities on which to work under
CIALCA.
13 August 2014
R4D platform meeting to continue working on R4D activities under CIALCA.

10
14 August 2014
IP meeting to discuss activities proposed by R4D platform. IP members discuss whether
changes are needed, when and where to start implementation, popular varieties and local
contact persons. Using this as a base, lead persons for activities later finalise work plans.
20-24 October 2014
Implementation of intercropping trials.
4 November 2014
R4D platform meeting to be informed about the concept proposal for platform-led innova-
tion fund (also known as ‘Cluster 4’). Platform members discuss the proposal and identify
some missing topics in terms of the proposal matching the needs expressed in RAAIS.
4 November 2014
R4D platform subcommittee of researchers and the national facilitator meet with situation
analysis team and discusses the plans.
19 November 2014
R4D platform meeting to broaden the scope and further specify the proposal for plat-
form-led innovation fund based on template developed in a regional meeting with the
facilitators in Nairobi. The platform works in different groups in relation to ‘systems pro-
ductivity and NRM’, ‘nutrition’, ‘market and income’, and ‘gender.’
24 November 2014
Implementation of platform-led innovation fund activities starts, with focus group discus-
sions to discuss challenges, problems faced and needs of farmers with regard to pigs and
implementing this R4D activity.
8-13 December 2014
Survey on manure flows conducted and materials for pig sties are distributed. Farmers
start building pig sties, and small test fields to compare different yam bean seeds are
established.
1 December 2014
CGIAR researchers meet and reflect on the platform process. They decide to shift focus
from R4D platform to IP level and to establish a small core team consisting of members of
both platforms (henceforth referred to as core team).
4 December 2014
Researchers from IITA and the national facilitator meet with potential core team members.
They explain their ideas, ask whether these people agree to form the core team and discuss
urgent challenges of IP farmers in relation to trials. The Director General of extension joins
the meeting to be aware about the core team and its function.
9 December 2014
First core team meeting. The national facilitator explains about the program and the core

11
team. Then, the group discusses 1) its role, tasks and activities as a team; 2) how to collab-
orate with the IP, R4D platform and farmers; 3) role division and communication within the
team; 4) frequency of meetings and members’ time investment; 5) practicalities of function-
ing as a team; and 6) follow-up of the meeting.
30 December 2014
Meeting to provide core team with materials (papers, raincoats, a communication fee). They
give an elaborate update about field activities and challenges and opportunities relating to
these.
5 January 2015
IP reflects on the platform process and R4D activities to date in the Humidtropics platform
reflection meeting.
6 January 2015
R4D platform reflects on the platform process and R4D activities to date in the Humid-
tropics platform reflection meeting.
5-10 January 2015
Farmers with pig sties receive three pigs each.
22 January 2015
Potato trials established under platform-led innovation fund.
3 February 2015
Core team meeting to discuss progress and potential challenges relating to R4D activities
and how to tackle these, relevance of potential research questions and plans proposed by
CIALCA researchers and nutrition research that students from the University of Burundi will
start soon. Comments made by the core team are passed on to the people concerned.
30 January-20 March 2015
Nutrition survey conducted by a student from the University of Burundi.
9-12 February 2015
Focus group discussions with farmers about challenges and opportunities for pigs in Gitega.
16-17 February 2015
Soil sampling in maize–soybean trials and start of soybean harvesting. IITA lead researcher
demonstrates harvesting to extension officers of core team who will continue.
23 February 2015
R4D platform meets and the researcher supporting activities implemented under the plat-
form-led innovation fund presents the first financial and technical report. Platform members
comment on this.
9-10 March 2015
Training on pig health conducted by ISABU.

12
11-13 March 2015
Training on pig feeding conducted by ISABU.
27 March 2015
Facilitation team and additional CGIAR researchers meet to discuss ongoing activities,
continuation of existing activities, starting new activities, their plan to open another Field
Site in Cibitoke, R4D platform and member engagement and an action plan.
15 April-30 May 2015
Installing/building composters on farms involved in R4D activities with pigs.
16-17 April 2015
Local field assistant is hired by IITA to assist in monitoring R4D activities. He is introduced
to participating farmers and core team.
16 April 2015
Core team meeting with local field assistant and IITA lead researchers to discuss R4D
activities: progress, challenges and how to act on these.
17-24 April 2015
Several informal talks involving the national facilitator and IITA researchers to reflect on
the poor performance of some R4D trials and insufficient involvement of the IP and R4D
platform since start of core team. It is decided to urgently organise platform meetings to
re-involve members in the process.
25 April 2015
Political turmoil in Burundi. Many activities are put on hold – except for urgent ones – and
most international research staff leave the country.
May-August 2015
The members of the facilitation and research team still in Burundi continue to liaise with
local core team members and technician (who is in the field 2-3 times a week). They also
meet regularly to organise field work and secure resources (as the donor of the platform-led
innovation fund is initially hesitant to provide them because of the security situation).
Field work goes well, and in June the national facilitator and local IITA staff meet with the
core team and visit farmers’ fields.
12 May 2015
Harvesting potato trials.
31 May 2015
Harvesting yam bean trials.
End of May 2015
Several meetings at the Burundi border between local IITA staff and country representa-
tive/lead researcher of banana intercropping trials. They discuss management of office

13
and projects in absence of international staff and hand over data collection sheets for
trials. Local staff member visits Gitega to pass on information on trials to technician
19 June 2015
R4D platform meeting to discuss second technical report of Cluster 4 activities. R4D plat-
form is updated about seasonal activities and temporary relocation of international CGIAR
research staff.
27-29 July 2015
Second survey on nutrient flows.
3-7 August 2015
Second round of introducing pigs in Gitega; 90 pigs are distributed.
17 August 2015
Survey and focus group discussion on gender implications of the introduction of the pigs.
Platform meetings and the start of field activities
After both the R4D platform and the IP had discussed the R4D ac-
tivities on which to focus in Burundi, another regional meeting was
conducted in July 2014 with researchers involved in CIALCA to learn
about Humidtropics and discuss fieldwork options. Although both
programs had significant overlap in methodology, researchers’ over-
all understanding of multi-stakeholder processes and the systems ap-
proach was still limited. According to one participant, this – together
with budgetary and expertise constraints – restricted their ability to
plan research activities that really went beyond farming system and
intercropping research on which they had been working until then.
In August, the R4D platform met again – twice – to discuss and pri-
oritise the outcomes generated in the RAAIS workshop, their own
launch meeting and the CIALCA meeting, and work in groups on ac-
tion plans for five different R4D activities proposed (Photo 6). These
were 1) banana-bean/tree tomato intercropping, 2) maize-soybean
intercropping with climbing bean in rotation, 3) cassava-bean inter-
cropping and assessing options for livestock integration, 4) pota-
to-bush bean rotation, and 5) rice-vegetables rotation.
The action plans were in turn presented to the IP on 14 August 2014.
The members discussed whether they thought changes were re-
quired, where and when to start implementation, which varieties they
preferred and local contact persons (Photo 7). The IP agreed with the
activities but noted that the rains had started and some fields were
already being ploughed, requiring implementation to speed up. Also,
they pointed out that the livestock component – which had been a
PHOTO 6 R4D platform meeting 4
August 2014: members discuss
R4D activities and action plans are
presented.

14
predominant priority in RAAIS – was still missing. For the time being,
this had been put aside by the R4D platform because of lack of fund-
ing and expertise in this domain. The same was true for many of the
institutional and economic constraints mentioned.
On the basis of the input given by IP members, the theme leaders
and groups were asked to finalise their work plans. However, two of
the five activities ended up being rejected after all. According to the
national facilitator, these were the ‘rice-vegetables rotation’ as the
lead person was not able to finish the work plan on time, and the ‘po-
tato-bush beans rotation’ since the activity was more development
oriented than research oriented as well as very costly. In addition, he
said that they had been marked as less systems oriented than the oth-
er activities. By the end of October 2014, the approved field trials were
implemented by the responsible R4D platform members in collabo-
ration with trial hosts and extension officers. An exception was made
for beans for the banana-bean intercrop and the cassava-bean inter-
crop as the suitable planting period for beans had already passed.
Simultaneously, starting in June 2014, a selection of R4D platform
members began working on a proposal for additional activities being
implemented through a platform-led innovation fund (also known as
‘Cluster 4’). This funding was allocated to, and managed by, the plat-
form and intended to strengthen the integration of, and the connec-
tion between, other (field) activities. The lead group consisted of staff
from IITA, Bioversity International, ISABU (including the national fa-
cilitator) and the university. After joint brainstorming, the researchers
from ISABU finished the writing process. Two rounds of submission
to the Humidtropics Management Team were needed to get the pro-
posal for the platform-led innovation fund accepted in September
2014.
After this approval, the proposal for the platform-led innovation fund
was presented to the whole R4D platform during a meeting on 4 No-
vember 2014 (Photo 8), and all members were asked to give feedback
on it. The proposal added the initially lacking livestock component
to the R4D activities, but there was still a significant overlap with
what was already happening in the field as well as a strong focus on
productivity. This was pointed out during the meeting by a visiting
scientist from IITA/Wageningen University who urged the platform
to go back to the needs identified during RAAIS and more closely link
the proposal to those. Additional domains of impact were also sug-
gested (e.g. communication, gender and nutrition). Later on, these
domains were added to the proposal by the national facilitator and
one of his colleagues from ISABU. Subsequently, the final proposal
was taken to a regional coordination meeting in Nairobi on 6-7 No-
PHOTO 7 IP meeting 14 August 2014:
IP members discuss R4D activities
proposed by R4D platform.
PHOTO 8 R4D platform meeting 4
November 2014.

15
vember 2014 where all national facilitators of Humidtropics in East
and Central Africa were trained on how to make the proposal more
systems oriented. This fed into a second R4D platform planning meet-
ing on 19 November 2014 where the platform continued working on
the final platform-led innovation fund proposal using a pre-made tem-
plate featuring the main domains of impact of the program: ‘systems
productivity and NRM,’ ‘nutrition,’ ‘market and income,’ and ‘gender.’
Initially, this task caused confusion among R4D platform members.
However, after additional explanation about what was expected from
them, they actively started working on a detailed outline of R4D activ-
ities, including timespan, budgets and responsible persons. Challeng-
es during this meeting were that those planning for the different do-
mains sometimes had limited expertise in these, not everyone spoke
the same language and planning was done in separate domain-based
groups, all of which restricted profound integration of the different ac-
tion plans.
After the meeting, the national facilitator pooled the results from the
group work to finalise the proposal, and, in the last week of Novem-
ber 2014, implementation of this second round of R4D activities took
off. According to the researcher supporting activities under the plat-
form-led innovation fund, the introduction of livestock (pigs) was pri-
oritised and other work would be added later depending on availability
of funds.
The research for development activities in Burundi are summarised in
Box 4.
BOX 4 Research for development activities in Burundi
Starting at the end of October 2014, the first four R4D trials were implemented, testing dif-
ferent intercropping systems in Gitega, in Carire and Murayi Communes. Subsequently, pigs
for manure production, potato research and fodder crops were introduced, and research
activities focusing on nutrition, gender and the platform process started.
Improved banana-legume/tree tomato intercropping
Trials on banana (improved varieties FHIA 17 or FHIA 25 and the popular local variety
Incakara) intercropped with beans (variety MLB 122-94B) or tree tomato were estab-
lished in Gitega to study yield, manure use preferences and labour. Through participatory
on-farm research, this experiment aims to improve productivity, income and nutrition (e.g.
beans provide a source of protein and tree tomatoes provide a source of vitamins), while
protecting the environment and conserving natural resources. In total, 2x4 trials have been
established.

16
Maize and soybean intercropping with climbing beans in rotation
In total, 11 on-farm maize and soybean intercropping trials were established in Gitega using
varieties recommended by the IP. Subsequently, climbing beans were planted that use the
post-harvest maize stems as stakes. The experiment tests the effects of different intercrop-
ping technologies (including farmers’ own practice) and the monocrops, in terms of grain
yield production, crop performance and labour requirements. Analysis will include economic
modelling and trade-off analysis between production and NRM based on different resource
inputs and outputs. Eventually, this research should contribute to improving productivity,
food security, nutrition and soil fertility management (Photo 9).
Cassava and beans
Mainly focusing on increasing productivity in terms of economic yield and crop residues for
livestock feeding, improving income and soil fertility, six trials on improved cassava and le-
gume intercropping have been established. The trials demonstrate the performance of three
cassava varieties (two improved and one local) in monocrop as well as in intercrop with
kidney beans – however, because the planting time had passed, beans could only be added
in the second planting season. Data collection includes crop yield data and crop destination
data, allowing economic analysis.
Pigs (livestock) for manure production
By late January 2015, pigs had been introduced to 10 farmers in Carire Commune (incl. five
female) and 10 farmers in Murayi Commune (incl. four female) of varying economic status.
Preceding introduction, focus group discussions were conducted to discuss challenges and
farmers’ needs with regard to pig management and research implementation, and surveys
on manure and fertiliser usage were carried out. To construct pig sties, farmers were given
the bulk of the building material (e.g. wooden planks and roof tiles) but were requested to
provide the rest as well as the labour themselves. Each participating farmer – who (almost)
all also hosted intercropping trials – received three pigs on the condition that, after repro-
duction, three piglets would be passed on to another farmer under the same conditions.
Most pigs provided were female as these can give birth and were therefore preferred by
farmers. Linked to the introduction of the pigs, compost piles were built, fodder options
were experimented with, focus group discussions to discuss pig health were held, and train-
ing on pig health and pig feeding was conducted. During the focus group discussions, ideas
were raised about setting up a system whereby farmers would contribute money to buy med-
icines, which any of them could use if required (or use part of the pooled money) and pay
it back later.
Multi-purpose fodder crops
To tackle farmers’ challenge to feed their livestock/pigs, innovative multi-purpose fodder
options were explored: that is, planting grasses (Pennisetum) that yield good fodder on rel-
atively little land, while simultaneously having a dual natural resource management function
(e.g. erosion control and banana mulching) and the introduction of the relatively unknown
dry-tolerant yam bean. Yam bean – which was introduced as livestock feed but can also be
eaten by human beings – provides high yields and is easy to multiply, since it is the tubers
not the beans/seeds that are eaten. The first phase of yam bean introduction encompassed
small testing fields to investigate the performance of three different varieties.
PHOTO 9 Data collection in
maize-soybean field.

17
Identifying most effective potato varieties
Delayed due to miscommunication between farmers and the R4D platform, four potato tri-
als were established in Gitega in January 2015 (Photo 10). The trials test the performance of
six different potato varieties provided by ISABU in Gitega. The plan is to select some of these
varieties to start potato-bean rotation.
Nutrition survey
Under supervision of the R4D representative from the University of Burundi, some students
conducted surveys and focus group discussions on nutrition, including food habits (also
related to land assets), problems relating to food and nutrition, and major causes of these
problems. The research took place between 30 January 2015 and 20 March 2015. Eventually,
it should also generate advice on potential solutions/strategies for improvement.
Researching the effectiveness of multi-stakeholder platforms
A variety of event registrations forms, questionnaires, pictures, audio recordings, videos,
participant lists, meeting minutes and so forth is used to thoroughly study the multi-stake-
holder process through which Humidtropics is functioning. Using a combination of qualita-
tive and quantitative data collection and analysis, this research investigates the effectiveness
of the platform process. As part of this platform research, social network analysis question-
naires were used in August 2014 to capture the basic information on the networks within
the R4D platform in Burundi. The information collected will be analysed to identify potential
strengths and weaknesses of the R4D platform to enable and improve collaboration, knowl-
edge exchange and learning, and to influence and lobby among different stakeholders at
different levels in agricultural problems. Insights will result in advice to the platforms and
feed into social network research.
Gender study
To strengthen the gender research in Humidtropics, a workshop was organised in Novem-
ber 2014 to train key persons in conducting focus group discussions and collecting empir-
ical data on the relationship between gender norms, agency and agricultural innovation.
The information collected will be used to write case studies about the communities studied
and facilitate better understanding of the gender-based constraints and the social context
surrounding them. This should feed into the design of R4D activities to actively promote
the empowerment of women and youth and stimulate lasting and equitable agricultural de-
velopment. In Burundi, these focus group discussions were conducted in December 2014 in
Cibitoke Province.
The establishment of a core team to strengthen communication
On 1 December 2014 when the first round of intercropping trials had
been established and the second round of fieldwork was about to take
off, a selection of researchers from IITA and Bioversity International
involved in R4D activities conducted a reflection and strategic plan-
ning meeting. They expressed concern that to date most attention and
resources had been targeting the R4D platform, which required a lot
of pushing to keep things going. More specifically, they pointed out
PHOTO 10 Potato trial in February 2015
one month after trial establishment.

18
that there was i) little engagement among R4D platform members
to participate or invest in activities (e.g. because members did not
see how the platform benefited them), ii) poor linkage between the
R4D platform (mainly involved in planning and coordinating activit
ies) and the IP (local stakeholders at implementation level), iii) little
ownership among both R4D platform and IP members with regard
to R4D activities and iv) insufficient integration between the different
R4D activities. Hence, the researchers decided to try shifting focus to
the local IP level (Figure 2).
The underlying idea was that at local level things become more con-
crete than when activities are being planned from within a meeting
room far away from the field. Consequently, it might be easier for
IP members to see how the platform can benefit them and to moti-
vate them to participate. In addition, it was envisioned that increas-
ing these local partners’ influence and decision-making power would
strengthen their perceived ownership. The concrete change agreed
upon was the establishment of a core team (Box 5) consisting of four
IP members and three R4D platform representatives who would be-
come actively involved in all ongoing R4D activities. In this way, they
should ensure better communication between the IP and the R4D
platform, speed up responsiveness in the event of problems arising
on the ground and improve integration of activities by functioning as
a slot through which all R4D activities had to pass.
FIGURE 2 Schematic representation of
the proposed change in focus.
2014 Current focus
2015
2016 Envisioned focus
R4D IP
Feedback on planned and ongoing
(research) activities
Way forward

19
BOX 5 Composition of the core team
The core team is a small gender-balanced team of people involved in R4D activities
who represent both the R4D platform and the IP (Photo 11). Its three R4D platform
representatives are the national facilitator and the coordinator of the platform-led
innovation fund, both from ISABU, and the multi-stakeholder documentation person from
IITA. ISABU and IITA are also the leading research institutions for current R4D activities.
The four IP representatives are active in either Carire or Murayi Commune. There is one
female farmer leader from Carire, one female agriculture teacher from Murayi and two
male extension officers who are each responsible for one of the Communes and assist the
researchers in the R4D work.
After a brainstorming session between IITA and Bioversity Interna-
tional researchers and the national facilitator, potential candidates for
the core team were asked about their willingness to fulfil this import-
ant role. The team met officially for the first time on 9 December 2014
(Photo 12) to discuss these roles and the main activities as a team,
how they would collaborate with the R4D platform and the IP, their
in-team roles and responsibilities, frequency of meetings, and some
practicalities like how to organise communication and minimal re-
quirements to function as a team.
Increasing energy in the eld
The establishment of the core team initially led to a reduction in IP
and R4D platform meetings (Photo 13). In the six-month period af-
ter the core team was established, the IP came together once for a
platform reflection meeting, and the R4D platform met twice: once
for a platform reflection meeting and once to be informed about the
technical and financial report of the platform-led innovation fund. In
contrast, the core team met at least six times during this period. In
addition, subsets of this team collaborated and interacted even more
frequently, and the IP representatives regularly visited trial hosts and
updated the R4D platform representatives about these farmers.
In this period, the core team definitely proved its usefulness. Existing
problems relating to field work – previously unknown by R4D platform
members – suddenly came to light. For example, some banana suck-
ers had been stolen from research fields, and some IP farmers appar-
ently had not planted anything in their fields as they still expected to
receive potato seeds. In effect, although potato trials had been among
the initially planned R4D activities discussed in the last IP meeting in
August 2014, the farmers had never realised that this trial had been
rejected by R4D platform members later on. Learning about these and
other challenges in the Field Site enabled the R4D platform represen-
tatives in the core team to pass on this information to the R4D plat-
PHOTO 12 National facilitator explains
ideas about core team to its local
members on their first meeting on 9
December 2014.
PHOTO 13 Core team meeting 3 February
2015.
PHOTO 11 Core team.

20
form members, who subsequently stepped in to solve the problems.
In addition, when new R4D activities arose – for example, additional
activities planned by CIALCA researchers and students of a university
professor from the R4D platform who wanted to work on nutrition –
the core team met with the new participants to assure alignment with,
and relevance for, existing R4D activities. In this way, the core team
became the main channel for feedback and planning that linked the
key partners involved in R4D activities.
At the same time, the implementation of additional field work financed
by the platform-led innovation fund brought in some additional ele-
ments of success: greater flexibility for activities to be demand driv-
en, better interlinkage between R4D activities and increased visibility.
Firstly, the researcher supporting activities implemented under the
platform-led innovation fund conducted multiple surveys and focus
group discussions preceding implementation to further specify the
planned R4D activities together with farmers. Moreover, when the
problem emerged of farmers still awaiting potato research, it was the
platform-led innovation fund that provided flexibility to cater for this
need and implement additional potato trials to prevent farmers from
waiting for nothing and perhaps losing trust in the platform. Second-
ly, as the central activity of the platform-led innovation fund was the
introduction of pigs (Photos 14 and 15) for manure production, it pro-
vided an opportunity to link this work to the other R4D activities which
made use of manure application and which could render residues to
be fed to the pigs. Thirdly, the introduction of pigs also generated a lot
of enthusiasm on the ground, which – combined with the increased
number of activities and the actual presence of researchers in the field
at that time – helped to attract attention and make the platform’s work
more visible.
Nevertheless, although these two interventions – the core team and
the platform-led innovation fund – undeniably triggered progress in
R4D activities in terms of catering for farmers’ needs and improv-
ing collaboration between involved farmers, extension officers and
researchers, they simultaneously comprised a challenge for the
multi-stakeholder process. Firstly, their success in linking those direct-
ly involved in the fieldwork somehow made additional involvement of
the R4D platform and the IP as drivers of R4D work redundant, thus
reducing the link with partners in the R4D platform and the IP that
were not (yet) directly involved in ongoing R4D activities. Secondly,
as was explained by the IITA country representative, the positions of
the local core team members (e.g. farmers and extension officers)
created a barrier for communicating frequently with their superiors
or other stakeholders in higher power positions. Lastly, new partners
that wanted to come on board the IP might not be aware of the core
PHOTO 14 Researcher supporting
platform-led innovation fund
activities checks on partially
finished pig sties in Gitega.
PHOTO 15 National facilitator
monitoring pigs for manure
production in Murayi Commune.

21
team and its function, thus inhibiting their participation. Realisation
of this dual effect – halfway through April 2015 – motivated the facil-
itation team to immediately plan additional platform meetings to try
to restore the involvement of these partners. However, as this insight
was quickly followed by political turmoil in Burundi, this plan was not
fully put into action and was postponed.
Continuation under political uncertainty
From the end of April 2015 onwards, political turmoil paralysed most
activities in the capital Bujumbura. Many people fled the country, and
research and development organisations (among which IITA and Bio-
versity International) relocated their international staff outside Bu-
rundi.
Nevertheless, the national facilitator, the researcher supporting the
platform-led innovation fund, and other IITA and Bioversity Interna-
tional staff continued the R4D activities as much as possible. They
kept in contact with the local core team members and appointed a
field technician. The field technician went to the field 2-3 times a week
to follow up field activities and help farmers to overcome constraints.
He also collected data with the lead researchers of R4D activities and
informed everyone about what needed to be done. Also, they regu-
larly met among themselves to coordinate the fieldwork and secure
a second round of platform-led innovation funding which the donor
initially was hesitant to provide because of the security situation in
Burundi. Halfway through June, the national facilitator and an IITA
representative went to the field to conduct a core team meeting and
visit the R4D activities. Shortly afterwards – on 19 June 2015 – an R4D
platform meeting was organised to discuss the second technical re-
port of the platform-led innovation fund and activities for the coming
season, and to inform platform members about the temporary relo-
cation of international research staff.
In this period, many field activities were conducted under the plat-
form-led innovation fund. From mid-April 2015 until the end of May
2015, composters were built on farms that had received pigs, and
harvesting of potato trials and yam bean fields took place on 12 and
31 May 2015, respectively. A nutrient flow survey was conducted be-
tween 27 and 31 July to complete previously collected data. Moreover,
between 3 and 7 August, a second round of pig provision took place
and a survey investigating the gender impact of introducing pigs was
conducted between 17 and 21 August.

22
The facilitation team
Since the start of Humidtropics in Burundi, a national facilitator has
facilitated the multi-stakeholder processes. This facilitator is em-
ployed by ISABU and has a background in soil science. Over time,
varying in terms of intensity and presence, he has been assisted by
colleagues from ISABU, staff from the research institutes IITA (the
lead institution) and Bioversity International, staff from the NGOs
Floresta and RB2000+, and four local partners who joined the core
team (two extension officers, a school teacher and a farmer leader).
Hence, in changing compositions, these people can be considered as
the Humidtropics facilitation team in Burundi.
Initially, when the program was starting up and the multi-stakeholder
platforms were not yet established, the main activities of the facili-
tation team were the preparation and follow-up of launch meetings
and agreed-upon activities, organising logistics, lobbying for the plat-
form and the program, discussing how to organise and implement
the program, and identifying Field Sites and Entry Themes on which
to focus. In this phase, the main players were ISABU, IITA, Bioversity
International and Floresta (all based in Bujumbura), and RB2000+
(based in Gitega). Within the team, the country coordinator from
IITA gave a lot of guidance in terms planning of the process. This
coordinator and the representative from Floresta fulfilled the role of
secretary, and the IP facilitator from RB2000+ focused on sensitising
farmers, confirming sites and validating constraints identified in the
launch meetings.
Following RAAIS in February 2014, the group continued to meet,
but not as regularly as before. In this period, some of them joined
capacity development workshops in Rwanda, DR Congo and Kenya
that focused on increasing understanding of the program, platforms
and facilitating multi-stakeholder processes. In this period, not much
happened on the ground.
In June 2014, when the platforms were established and the plat-
form-led innovation fund was introduced, the facilitation team’s
main activities changed. That is, in addition to preparing and follow-
ing up meetings and agreed-upon activities and organising logistics,
they now also focused on selecting potential platform members, es-
tablishing the R4D platform and the IP, developing proposals and
research protocols, organising platform meetings, documenting the
multi-stakeholder process and implementing the R4D activities. The
writing of research protocols and the preparation of trials were un-
dertaken mainly by the lead researchers from IITA. Activities were im-
plemented mainly by the coordinator from IITA in collaboration with
PHOTO 16 National facilitator and lead
researcher checking protocol with
extension officer and farmer when
inspecting a maize-soybean field.

23
farmers and extension officers, and backstopped by the researchers
(Photo 16). In this period, another scientist from ISABU who coor-
dinated the implementation of activities under the platform-led in-
novation fund also became active. Additionally, IITA hired two social
scientists to support the multi-stakeholder process in June and No-
vember 2014, respectively. The first one was a senior scientist with a
global role in the program who had a mandate to strategically sup-
port and guide in the process. The second one was a junior scientist
focusing on documentation and facilitation of the multi-stakeholder
process. Around October 2014, the IP facilitator became less active in
the facilitation team as the R4D activity he was supposed to lead was
not approved and he could not get a memorandum of understanding
with IITA as demanded by his organisation. Also, Floresta and some
of the ISABU staff that had been involved at the start slightly reduced
their participation.
In December 2014, when most field activities were either established
or awaiting implementation, the facilitation team members from IITA
and Bioversity International discussed a strategic shift of focus from
national to local level and drove – together with the national facili-
tator and the lead person of the platform-led innovation fund – the
establishment of the core team. From that moment onwards, the
core team members and the IITA coordinator, in turn backstopped
by the leading researchers from IITA (Photo 17) became the more ac-
tive members of the facilitation team. Their main tasks in this phase
were linking stakeholders, ensuring communication, feedback and
quick responsiveness to problems/need on the ground, (assisting
with) implementation, monitoring and data collection on R4D activ-
ity, improving integration between R4D activities, documenting the
process, organising logistics and re-directing the process or activities
when necessary.
Linkage, communication and feedback
With changes in the main actors in the facilitation team as well as the
varying intensity of platform meetings, communication and feedback
between the stakeholders involved in the multi-stakeholder process
also changed.
In the first phase – before the R4D platform and the IP were estab-
lished – face-to-face communication took place in many small meet-
ings involving mainly IITA, Bioversity International and ISABU, infor-
mal meetings with strategic partners (including policymakers) and
big launch meetings. Moreover, telephone, email and invitation let-
ters were used as vehicles for communication. Communication be-
PHOTO 17 National facilitator, lead
researchers and core team meet and
visit R4D activities on 17 April 2015.

24
tween the national and the Field Site level took place mainly through
the IP facilitator RB2000+ or when partners based in Bujumbura de-
cided to join meetings conducted in the Field Site.
In the next period – once the platforms were established – the com-
munication channels remained generally the same, except that plat-
form meetings became an additional channel for regular face-to-face
communication. These meetings often included oral updates, Power-
Point presentations, flipcharts, handouts, group discussions, infor-
mal talks and so on. In addition, the start of R4D activities added
options for informal communication between local IP members and
R4D platform partners involved in implementation.
Around December 2014 – when the core team was established – plat-
form meetings became fewer, and most communication occurred
through the core team members (Photo 18). Within the core team,
the members from Carire and Murayi Communes facilitated commu-
nication between farmers and the rest of the team. They visited these
farmers to inquire about the trials, challenges, opportunities, needs
and next steps, and gave updates about this during their monthly core
team meetings. In addition, the extension officers assisted with the
on-farm R4D activities, backstopped by the coordinator from IITA, the
researcher supporting the platform-led innovation fund, researchers
from IITA and/or the national facilitator. In this way, more communi-
cation was enabled between the core team, the lead researchers and
the farmers. Subsequently, information fed into the core team was
communicated to active R4D platform members (e.g. IITA, Bioversity
International, ISABU and the University of Burundi) through informal
meetings, phone calls, emails and activity reports. In addition, the
R4D platform met once on 23 February 2015 to discuss the technical
and financial report of the platform-led innovation fund.
A challenge mentioned by one R4D platform member in relation
to communication and collaboration is that platform membership
keeps on changing. So, when meetings are conducted, one can find
that some people are not aware of decisions that have been taken,
and this can result in having to go back over, or even re-open, dis-
cussions that have already been decided upon. In contrast, an oppor-
tunity mentioned was that the venue for platform meetings should
be rotated to different R4D platform partners. This would stimulate
information circulation and visibility there. At the moment however,
most meetings are organised at ISABU, which often is also highly
represented in R4D platform meetings, as are CGIAR researchers.
PHOTO 18 IITA researcher and core
team members ask farmer about
experiences with trial when visiting
Gitega in February 2015.

25
“There is information sharing between the groups, but it is
not enough. (…) It is not instantené, we have to wait for
meetings, and between two meetings there is nothing.”
Researcher supporting platform-led innovation fund (9 March 2015)
In general, the ISABU researcher supporting activities under the plat-
form-led innovation fund explained that the intensity of communi-
cation between R4D platform meetings is rather low. It is generally
limited to those directly involved in activities – for example, when
they coordinate their work or inform one another about what needs
to be done. Other R4D platform members often have to wait for up-
dates during platform meetings. This was confirmed by one of the
IITA researchers who mentioned that, when she arrived in November
2014, some of her colleagues could not tell her what exactly was go-
ing on in the field, especially in relation to the recently started plat-
form-led innovation fund. Moreover, during the R4D platform meet-
ing of 19 November 2014 – when platform members were working on
the platform-led innovation fund proposal – some of them did not
know what this fund was. In contrast, the communication in the field
as well as between core team members and R4D platform members
implementing activities was more continuous and evolving.
Decision-making power over research activities
As Humidtropics aims to collaborate with different organisations and
projects that already exist in the country, the pre-defined target ar-
eas, objectives, enterprises and expertise of these organisations and
projects can potentially influence what is or is not possible to imple-
ment. Hence, whereas many R4D activities were funded through the
relatively flexible platform-led innovation fund (which targeted the IP
and had to cover Humidtropics’ general domains of impact), some
others funds were more restricted. For example, CIALCA funds that
enabled implementation of R4D activities through the R4D platform
and the IP were intended to target cassava, banana, seed systems
and market, irrespective of location. Other partners, for example GIZ
and World Vision, which might have had other domains of impact,
were bound to specific locations, other than the selected Humid-
tropics Field Sites.
Nevertheless, to stimulate the demand-drivenness of the multi-stake-
holder process, a RAAIS workshop was conducted to identify the
challenges and Entry Points of different (local) stakeholders. These
were taken as the starting point for designing R4D activities. One
year later, in a reflection meeting in January 2015, the platforms were
asked to rate how much they thought that the current R4D activities

26
targeted the priority constraints. The perceived division of focus on
the different constraints of both the R4D platform and the IP is shown
in Table 3. It suggests that, around that time, platform members felt
that the platform’s work focused most on two out of three productiv-
ity constraints, one out of two NRM constraints and one out of three
constraints relating to institutions and markets.
The researcher supporting the platform-led innovation fund men-
tioned that the R4D platform has the power to direct research. It can
propose activities, discuss field work plans and serve as the think
tank for proposal writing. However, he also explained that the plat-
form members tend to look to IITA or Bioversity International to pro-
vide input in terms of ideas as well as funds – something he consid-
ered logical as these were the ones initiating the whole process. He
thought that the R4D platform was getting more vocal over time and
starting to influence more; for example, the banana and tree tomato
intercropping trial is really a platform member-proposed innovation.
“If you want the platform to benefit you, it can benefit
you. Personally, I thought I could be involved and proposed
doing something with students and it was accepted. Now my
students are benefiting from that. It was really an opportunity to
train them in the field (…) without the platform that would not
have been possible. (…) Humidtropics is like a system and all
fields can be touched, so if you want to benefit from it, you can
Domain Productivity
(R4D platform 48% - IP 51%)
NRM
(R4D platform 26% - IP 22%)
Institutions and markets
(R4D platform 26% - IP 28%)
Constraint
Little knowhow of agricultural
production techniques
High pressure of diseases and
pests (for crops and livestock)
Insufficient improved varieties/
breeds in the crop–livestock
system
Scarcity of land and poor soil
fertility
Acidity of agricultural land
Lack of material and financial
resources
Lack of adequate sensitisation of
the population to the adoption of
innovation practices
Absence of agricultural credit poli-
cies to motivate the private sector
to invest
R4D
platform
20% 8% 20% 18% 8% 2% 25% 0%
IP 18% 8% 25% 21% 1% 6% 22% 0%
TABLE 3 Perceived division of focus of R4D
activities in targeting site-specic constraints.

27
benefit from it. (…) However, if you don’t link your activity to the
platform, you can’t have any interest. It is likely to follow.”
R4D platform member from University of Burundi (9 March 2015)
In relation to the R4D platform process so far, it seems that one way
for individual platform members to increase their influence on R4D
activities is to become active players. For example, both the research-
er supporting the platform-led innovation fund and a lecturer from
the University of Burundi went on to actually design specific R4D ac-
tivities after they agreed to implement or facilitate these. According
to this university lecturer – who is involved in nutrition research – the
R4D platform does provide opportunities for its members to become
involved. However, it is still in its first year, and many organisations
are involved in many activities and still seem to be in the phase of
looking and deciding whether they really want to be involved. This is
evidenced by the fact that many of them are sending representatives
rather than the people that can really make decisions. They are still
endeavouring to find their interest in the multi-stakeholder process.
At Field Site level, local stakeholders first had a chance to influence
R4D activities by specifying major challenges, opportunities and
cropping systems during the launch meeting of the program and
the IP in Gitega. Next, they were involved in selecting concrete Entry
Points for innovation during RAAIS and discussing action plans in
the IP meeting on 14 August 2014, during which they made small
changes in planned activities, decided on (local) varieties to use, and
when and where to implement work. Moreover, when the researchers
went to the field to implement R4D activities, informal interactions
as well as some focus group discussions and surveys took place to
assure local level input. Subsequently, when the trials were imple-
mented, farmers could indirectly influence decisions regarding con-
tinuation of R4D activities through the extent to which they managed
their fields. In addition, once the core team became active, its mem-
bers – and through them the farmers – gained another opportunity
to interact with the R4D platform members implementing research
and hence influence their decision making (Photo 19). For example,
this led to the addition of potato research in January 2015. According
to the researcher supporting the platform-led innovation fund, they
always try to involve farmers – either by asking their confirmation of
pre-developed plans or asking their input before designing activities.
Discussion and lessons learned
The first two years of the multi-stakeholder processes under Humid-
tropics in Burundi can roughly be divided into four phases. First, a
PHOTO 19 National facilitator explaining
shift of focus during R4D platform
reflection meeting 6 January 2015

28
small team surrounding the national facilitator and the country rep-
resentative of IITA organised launch meetings for the program and
the platforms. They were supported by regional (ECA) Humidtropics
staff. In addition, many small follow-up meetings between the partic-
ipating CGIAR centres and ISABU were conducted to discuss how to
implement the program. Second, after about one year, a new phase
started of platform meetings, planning of R4D activities and imple-
mentation of the first field trials. Third, the establishment of the core
team in December 2014 signalled again a new phase. In this period,
few official platform meetings were conducted and activities focused
on the Field Site. Collaboration and communication between the re-
searchers, extension officers and farmers directly involved in field
trials intensified tremendously, but R4D platform and IP members
that were not directly involved in R4D activities were partly bypassed.
From the end of April 2015 onwards, the last phase started. Because
of the political turmoil, many international researchers backstopped
the process from a distance while national staff from the research
centres and the university involved in collaboration with local stake-
holders continued managing R4D activities.
“In the Humidtropics proposal there is very little guidance in
terms of implementation. Concepts like bottom up, participatory,
group-based, demand-driven and systems-research,
they sound all very nice, but in terms of actually how to
implement it, there is very little guidance.”
IITA researcher (10 July 2015)
It is clear from looking at the first phase that there was considerable
repetition in terms of topics discussed during meetings; many talk-
ed about where to focus in terms of Field Sites, Entry Points, crop-
ping systems and/or major challenges. These are of course essential
questions at the start, but the amount of repetition suggests that
those implementing the program were still trying to find out how to
go about this and were learning while doing. Potentially, some guid-
ance in terms of strategies, tools or approaches to facilitate setting
up multi-stakeholder platforms might have speeded up the process.
The national facilitator expressed appreciation of such guidance ema-
nating from capacity development events and the involvement of the
social scientists from IITA and the RAAIS workshop.
In the second phase, challenges with regard to the R4D platform’s
limited engagement, poor linkage between the IP and the R4D plat-
form, little ownership among members of both platforms and little
integration of R4D activities raise some questions. For example, can a

29
multi-stakeholder process that operates on national level (mainly plan-
ning) and local level (mainly implementation) work out well and gener-
ate ownership among platform members when strong linkages between
the different levels are lacking – and, more drastically, should they even
be separated? Or, how should the focus best be divided between these
different platforms, with their respective levels and activities?
In the third phase of the multi-stakeholder process in Burundi, the above
questions were addressed by establishing a crosscutting core team to
strengthen communication, to ensure quick feedback and to increase
emphasis on the local implementation level. Subsequently, the increase
in enthusiasm was attributed to this core team, as well as to the plat-
form-led innovation fund that enhanced the flexibility of R4D activities
and enabled the introduction of the strongly desired pigs and potatoes.
This suggests that a strong linkage between planning and implementa-
tion level, an increased focus on implementation level, and the ability of
stakeholders involved in implementation to influence this, can indeed
trigger energy and interest in the R4D process. In addition, the enthusi-
asm attributable to the introduction of pigs and potatoes suggests that
R4D activities themselves – when successful and desired – can have a
similar positive effect on the multi-stakeholder process.
Unfortunately, five months after establishing the core team, the facilita-
tion team realised that the scope of this core team was too limited for it
to perform its role of linking stakeholders beyond those directly involved
in R4D activities. That is, the networks, communication flows and influ-
encing power of the core team members did not reach the whole range
of stakeholders participating in the platforms. Hence, the facilitation
team decided to quickly organise additional IP and R4D platform meet-
ings to re-engage their partners. This immediately points to another
lesson learned in Humidtropics Burundi, which is that, when different
platforms and levels are involved in a multi-stakeholder process, chan-
nels of communication should regularly reach all those directly and indi-
rectly involved. If not, additional channels, including platform meetings,
lobbying activities and regular updates, should be added to bridge the
gaps.
Finally, a challenge mentioned by the R4D platform representative from
the University of Burundi is the change of platform members. In differ-
ent meetings, the fact that often different representatives of the same
organisations participate causes delay when they need additional expla-
nation or want to re-do things worked on in previous meetings. Hence,
membership of the platform could be a topic for discussion at the start
of the platform process.

30
In summary, although the R4D process is definitely starting to take
off and generating more energy in Burundi, there are still challenges
along the way.

31
Bibliography and other sources
CIA (2015), The world factbook, Burundi. www.cia.gov/library/
publications/the-world-factbook/geos/by.html (retrieved on 24
June 2015).
CIALCA (2012), Final technical report 2009-2011.Report.
Humidtropics (2012), Integrated systems for the humid tropics.
Proposal.
Humidtropics (2013, September 3), Workshop report ‘Humidtropics
Burundi Field Site’ - Central Highlands (Plateaux Centraux) Region.
Meeting minutes.
Humidtropics (2014, June 24), Burundi R4D platform launch meeting
report. Meeting minutes.
Humidtropics (2014, June 25), Burundi innovation platform (IP)
launch meeting report. Meeting minutes.
Humidtropics (2014, December 1), Strategic planning meeting Team
HUBurundi. Meeting minutes.
Humidtropics (2014, December 9), Meeting of core team Carire and
Murayi. Meeting minutes.
Humidtropics.(2014, December 10), Humidtropics activities in Gitega
(Murayi and Carire). Report.
Humidtropics (2015, March 27), Humidtropics Team Burundi
meeting. Meeting minutes.
Humidtropics (2015, April), Humidtropics Burundi. An update and
outlook on sustainable intensification of agricultural systems in the
Central African Highlands. Progress report.
ISABU (2013, July 2-3), Humidtropics workshop report launched in
Burundi. Meeting minutes.
Lamers, D., Hicintuka, C., Okafor, C., Schut, M. (2015), Humidtropics
platform reflection meeting report - results Burundi January 2015.
Humidtropics.
Schut, M., Hinnou, L.C. (2014), Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural
Innovation Systems (RAAIS) workshops Burundi, DR Congo and
Rwanda. Wageningen University (WUR) and International
Institute for Tropics Agriculture (IITA). March 2014.
Humidtropics/ CIALCA. pp. 128.
Schut, M., Klerkx, L., Rodenburg, J., Kayeke, J., Raboanarielina, C.,
Hinnou, L.C., Adegbola, P.Y., van Ast, A., Bastiaans, L. (2015),
RAAIS: Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems
(Part I). A diagnostic tool for integrated analysis of complex
problems and innovation capacity. Agricultural Systems, 132,
1-11. Open Access: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S0308521X14001115

32
Interviewees
R4D platform member and professor of agricultural economics -
subsection food security, University of Burundi (9 March 2015)
Action Site facilitator Humidtropics Burundi (8 March 2015)
IP facilitator and representative of Reseau Burundi 2000+ (11 March
2015)
ISABU researcher supporting activities under the platform-led
innovation fund (9 March 2015)
Four farmers involved in R4D activities (10 March 2015)
Two extension officers involved in R4D activities and core team
members (10 March 2015)
Other sources
Event registration forms filled out for learning system, emails, partic-
ipant lists, photos, participatory observation (November 2014-April
2015) and regular reflection with a WUR PhD student studying the
Humidtropics platform process in East and Central Africa and CGIAR
researchers involved in Humidtropics Burundi.

34
The CGIAR Research Program on Integrat-
ed Systems for the Humid Tropics (Humid-
tropics) is an agricultural research for de-
velopment program led by the International
Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA). Hu-
midtropics aims for sustainable intensifica-
tion of agricultural systems to improve the
livelihoods of farm households. An important
intervention strategy in Humidtropics is the
strengthening of multi-stakeholder collabo-
ration and partnerships to achieve develop-
ment impact. To facilitate that, two types of
multi-stakeholder platforms have been estab-
lished in Burundi: a local level innovation plat-
form to foster participatory experimentation
in two communes in Gitega province, and a
national research for development platform
to bring on board the key scaling actors. Re-
search for development activities in Burundi
focus on crop–livestock integration.”
Humidtropics, a CGIAR Research Program
led by IITA, seeks to transform the lives of the
rural poor in tropical America, Asia and Africa.
Research organisations involved in core part-
nership with Humidtropics are AVRDC, Bio-
versity International, CIAT, CIP, FARA, icipe,
ICRAF, ILRI, IITA, IWMI and WUR.
humidtropics.cgiar.org.
Published by Humidtropics
October 2015. This document is licensed
for use under a Creative Commons Attribu-
tion-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unport-
ed Licence.