Harnessing research for development to tackle wicked problems - Water Scarcity, Livelihoods and Food Security - page 55

2 and 3. When Phase 3 was canceled, projects were reduced to three or four
years (excluding set up and launch). Some projects (see Chapter 8) are
nonetheless close to tipping points. “Change tends to be gradual and [imper-
ceptible], obtained through close and constant attention to relations between
the [BDC] and its target groups” (Geheb, 2012).

Partnerships, networking and engagement
The CPWF network is probably too expensive a model if your goals are
peer reviewed journal articles yet if the goal is broader, say R4D or devel-
opment of a specialized team, then the calculations would be different.
Partnerships get less expensive the longer they last and the more reliable
they become.

(Sullivan, 2012)

Partnerships and networks were central to the CPWF model of R4D. Basin
Coordinators and Project Leaders focused on developing partnerships and
collaboration. They found that personal contacts, social capital and engaging in
networks were key ways to advance R4D. The CPWF identified several
categories of partners and partnerships (Box 3.5).
A unique characteristic of the BDCs was that partners other than from
CGIAR Centers led 14 of the 29 commissioned projects, with more regional
and national partners. The large Mekong Program, with 19 projects, had 76
contracted partners and memoranda of understanding with seven government
agencies in the region (Clayton, 2013). The memoranda provided access for
CPWF field teams, formalized relationships between government agencies and
the program, and spun off new relationships and new initiatives (Geheb, 2011).
Key features of the CPWF R4D model were its roles as convener, engager,
negotiator, enabler, space provider and trusted broker. With CPWF research
outputs intended to contribute to development outcomes, partners brought
quality research to policymakers' attention. They also promoted conversations
between key people in research, policy and development. R4D required
partners with clear links, roles, mandates and perspectives, which provided
research-based, informed decision-making. The BDCs of Phase 2 focused on

Box 3.5 Categories of CPWF partners and partnerships
• Hosting and convening arrangements.

• Implementation partners, contracted partners who actually imple-

mented the agreed-upon program of work.

• Next users/end users.

• End users who we were trying to change. CPWF engaged directly

with its end users to make sure they were part of the research.