By John Bennett and Bing Bayot, 26 February 2004
Because of the high representation of Theme 1 among the projects most
likely to be funded, a significant part of the gap analysis for Theme
1 involves working with the funded teams to identify gaps that exist
within and among these projects and to take corrective action using
project or Theme 1 resources. Nevertheless, major gaps still exist
elsewhere – either because certain food sources or Benchmark
Basins are insufficiently covered by the funded portfolio, or because
key items of the Theme 1 agenda are weakly covered.
Gaps identified in the first
25 projects
(PN 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11,15,16,17, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 30,
34, 35, 37, 38, 40, 46, 47, 50)
|
Gaps filled by |
| Funding the next
25 projects
(PN 3, 4, 9, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32,
33, 36, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 48, 49)
|
Project proposals
that were not approved (ranked 51-98) |
Non-approved concept
notes |
| Gaps in Theme 1 activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Salinity in crops other than rice
|
|
|
|
- Comparative genetics of improved water productivity
|
|
|
|
- Direct access to IT by poor farmers and pastoralists
for water-related decision making
|
|
|
|
- Farmer’s access to credit
|
|
|
|
| Gaps in basin coverage: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gaps in food sources coverage: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conclusions:
- Some gaps will be filled by encouraging funded teams to make
adjustments in the emphasis that they give to sub-themes of Theme
1.
- Funding of specific full proposals and concept notes will fill
some gaps in basins (Andes, Sao Francisco, Yellow) and among crops
(soybean, fodders, potato, banana, plantains)
- Commissioned research was recommended on deep roots for drought
avoidance, use of IT for water-related decision making by the
poor, and INRM tailored micro-credit.
|
|