Harnessing research for development to tackle wicked problems - Water Scarcity, Livelihoods and Food Security - page 57

developed. It also allowed strong leaders and team members to be used to their
fullest. Nevertheless, individual project team accomplishments within a
complex partnership must be recognized, not hidden (Sullivan, 2012).
In the Andes BDC, a strong common vision allowed other partners,
including national institutions, to lead innovation and change, with the CPWF
offering support through relevant research results (Quintero, 2012; Saravia,
2012).
Understanding mandates and making strategic alliances
It is important that partnerships include institutions or organizations with
authority, decision-making power and credibility. Not including them
jeopardizes the R4D program.
The Mekong BDC found that formal memoranda of understanding with
the appropriate national authorities enabled progress.
The memoranda of understanding have served to gain access to govern-
ments; they have worked to reduce ambiguities and mistrust. They have
provided access for our field teams. They have formalized relationships
between the state and the program. And they have served to spin off new
relationships and new initiatives.
(Geheb, 2012)
Further to making strategic alliances, we again emphasize the need to be
flexible, even allowing the direction of the project to change. As we stated
above, it may be better to take account of the value obtained by using one or
more ecosystem services than to pay the cost of conserving them (Quintero,
2012).
The R4D design process
Projects will have a greater likelihood of influencing policy if they engage
national and regional level decision-makers at the beginning of the R4D
process. Keeping them engaged throughout the project ensures relevance and
shares ownership.
In the Ganges BDC, early engagement with decision-makers helped to align
projects with national priorities and policy—for example, government policies
on maintenance of rural infrastructure, which was a national priority (George
and Meisner, 2013), were the key to control water for farm intensification and
diversification proposed by the BDC.
In the Nile, the Ethiopian national sustainable land management (SLM)
program was involved in the BDC's innovation platform and steering com-
mittee and therefore in the stakeholder consultations. The Nile BDC was not
engaged with the implementation of the SLM program, although it helped
to reveal its top-down nature. The Nile BDC's key messages were strongly