Building Agricultural Education and Training Capacity in Post-Conflict Countries: Case Studies from South Sudan and Sub-Saharan Africa”

Innovation for Agricultural Training and Education

“Building agricultural education and training capacity in post-conflict countries: case studies from South Sudan and Sub-Saharan Africa”

August 20 and 21, 2013

Kampala, Uganda

Compiled by: A. L. (Tom) Hammett

USAID/BFS/ARP-Funded Project

Award Number: AID-OAA-L-12-00002

Contents

Workshop summary

Synthesis of working groups discussion – Day One

Synthesis of working groups discussion – Day Two

Summary of research priorities for AET capacity building in post-conflict environment

Recommendations

Appendices

Background

The workshop was originally scheduled as a side meeting during the Post-conflict Conference to be held at the University of Juba in South Sudan in early August. Due to the uncertainty after some sudden political changes during the first week of August, the venue was moved to Nairobi, Kenya. The international airport there caught fire causing massive disruption of air traffic and uncertainty of when the airport might be re-opened and return to normal service. So it was decided to move the workshop one more time – to Kampala, Uganda – starting a week later. All but two of the 20 planned participants in the original group were able to attend the newest (third) venue. These two were replaced by local participants working in Uganda.

Synthesis of Working Group Discussion – Day One (20 August 2013)

On the first day of the workshop, we focused primarily on examining case studies to summarize approaches and identify good practices taken to rebuild agricultural higher education capacity in several post-conflict countries in Africa (workshop objective number one). In addition, we also wished to document dialogue on our discussion of approaches to agricultural capacity building in African post-conflict countries (workshop objective number two). To accomplish this, we divided the full group of participants into three sub (working) groups and asked them to discuss key issues and strategies related to AET capacity in post-conflict countries. To ensure that we had the best possible interaction within the small groups, we selected members so that each group had similar membership (i.e., each group had a member from a regional organization, a woman, and at least one country representative).

The sub groups were asked to respond to six questions/focus points and present a summary of their group’s findings to the entire group. What follows is a summary of Day One’s (August 20, 2013) issues and strategies generated by the three working groups during discussion in the break-out sessions. Each group presented to the full workshop during the first morning session on Day Two (August 21, 2013). The summary notes for all groups are combined here.

1. What are the challenges to AET caused by post-conflict situations that need to be overcome?

 Shortages of qualified staff-capacity - gaps identified and need to be addressed  Shortage of resources/weak institutional setup in regards to: . Equipment . Infrastructure . Funding . Human resources . IT infrastructure  Weak institutional governance  Weak curriculum and pedagogy  Sub-optimal use of the available human capital and other resources  Weak linkages between the universities and stakeholders (i.e., NARS, Ministries, NGOs)  Inadequate/absence of post graduate programs  Weak capacity for research  Limited capacity to generate funds  Weak/inadequate managerial skills  Limited access to current scientific information  Poor reading culture/lack of mentorship/coaching  Inadequate quality control system  Lack of motivation/and inadequate remuneration of academic staff  Human resource development

 Rebuilding infrastructure (e.g., labs, etc.)  Lack of curriculum relevance to demand or not adopting curriculum according to needs  Unity and reconciliation for peace  Institutional organization  Quality and competence  Lack good advocacy (and linkages) to policy makers and partners  Reconciliation of people  Attracting and retaining trained staff  Gender issues in tertiary education

2. What are the consequences of post conflict situations for the agriculture sector?

 Low production-hence reduction of GDP  Destruction of human capacity  Weak refresher training mechanisms in improved technologies  Increased burden on women and juvenile due to food/nutrition insecurity and poor health systems  Destruction of institutional capacity  Lack of trust/confidence in export based on history  Mistrust between people themselves  Land conflict (e.g., military claiming most of agricultural land)  Weak agricultural technology development  Loss of agricultural inputs (seeds, planting materials, etc.)  Destruction of infrastructure (building, roads, roads, irrigation system, etc.)  Loss of institutional memory (and scientific data)  Breakdown of linkage (between farmers, and technicians and extension agents)  Loss of genetic resources  Dependency on imported food products  Brain drain (e.g., expertise)  Transitory administrative structures  Destruction of infrastructure  Destruction of social fabric  Loss of human capital  Breakdown of institutional systems (values, guiding principles, regulations, etc.)  Unsuitable curricula and delivery  Lack of strategic plans  Poor governance  Low and erratic financing  Overarching development issues (gender, climate change, etc.)  Value chain system disrupted (no incentives for demand growth for trained personnel)  Trauma - fear, dependency, disillusionment

 Insecurity - self and property  Decentralization and devolution without capacity

3. What approaches/AET strategies are needed to meet post-conflict challenges?

 Policy advocacy  Trainings at the PhD, MSc, and BSc levels  Recruit qualified staff (nationally, regionally and internationally)  Mentorships/short courses  Visiting lecturers to be identified  Staff exchanges  Develop capacity of staff to seek competitive grants  Competitive proposals for funding, including human capital development/infrastructure  Develop post graduate programs in post conflict countries so that there is a sustainable system to supply human resources  Strategic partnership with regional networks (e.g. RUFORUM, ASARECA, ANAFE and other universities)

4. What are successful post-conflict strategies and the results thus far? What has worked?

 Training, but still need further intervention  Partnerships strengthened  Fundraising through networks  Networking and exchange visits  Community of practice formation  Infrastructure support  Capacity building  Good service by universities through technical activities, (e.g., farmers, extension practitioners)  Contributions from the diaspora  Attractive environment or conditions for trainers and experts  Increase in GDP and improved food security  Retention of well trained staff  Increase of technicians in the field of agriculture (e.g., Rwanda example)  Rise in GDP and improved food security  No revenge (peace and reconciliation from the Rwanda example)  Opportunities for economic growth (household incomes and equitable distribution) (Rwanda example)  Expansion of system (higher education) physical infrastructure and increased intake (example from Ethiopia)

 Progressive leadership (good governance, good policies, visionary leadership) (example from both Rwanda and Ethiopia)  Devolution of responsibilities (power, resources, subsidiary ) (example from both Rwanda and Ethiopia)  Establishment of partnership with institutions, and countries base on capacity building and outreach (RUFORUM, RHEA, and AGRA) (an example from South Sudan)  Role of universities in government policy formulation (an example from South Sudan)  Incentives to attract staff  Initiation of tailor made training programs for front line extension workers by the Federal ministry in partnership with development partners (such as SG-2000) to overcome shortage of skilled manpower (Ethiopia example)  One example is the mid-career BSc in agricultural extension program started at Haramaya University (expanded to other universities), directly serving development policy of Ethiopia

5. What has not worked thus far?

 Government support and buy-in in higher education (examples from South Sudan. However, it is perhaps too early in this example for the government has more important priorities.)  Funding is still inadequate for students-the demand is increasing while resources are not increasing  The development of post graduate programs is underway; the process needs enforcement so that we get quality programs (This requires a lot of resources and qualified staff.)  Difficulty in retaining volunteers  Creating good or conducive environment for attracting experts in diaspora

6. What are some other approaches to coping with post-conflict situations in AET?

 Evaluation and planning of needs  Monitoring and evaluation of human resource programs  Fund mobilization and partnership  Establishment of documentation and database centers  Long-term master plan  Introducing new and attractive programs in all levels  National policy should be put in place and clearly defined  Introduction of dialogue mechanism  National planning involving all stakeholders

Synthesis of Working Group Discussion – Day Two (21 August 2013)

The following is a synthesis of the results of the workshop focused in four areas: defining post- conflict in the context of agricultural higher education; identifying best practices in Agriculture Education and Training (AET) in this case focusing on higher education; recommendations for strategies to cope with post-conflict situations with emphasis on South Sudan; and identifying and prioritizing a list of researchable topics for post-conflict countries. In general we use the term “good practice” with the understanding that it is close in definition to the term “best practice”, but is more suitable especially when comparing educational practices across varying regions, cultures, and higher educational environments. Here are the two objectives for today’s sessions: (1) Produce guidelines on post-conflict agricultural capacity building authored by the participants of the workshop, and (2) Develop a list of priority researchable topics for agricultural education capacity building in the region to build a learning agenda for innovATE and its partners.

The following summarizes the results of the discussion by all three of the small working groups held during Day Two.

1. Provide a definition of post-conflict in the context of AET.

Post-conflict is the period following violent destruction of physical, institutional, human, and natural resources in a society, country or interstate. It is characterized by specific stages, namely:  Initial stages- Directly following the conflict and the beginning stages of peace without war.  Peak/Rebuilding- As a result of interventions and support of the new government, many rebuilding activities are taking place around this time.  Normal-A country cannot remain a post-conflict country forever, at some stage things are beginning to settle in and business resumes as usual.

In general post-conflict indicators are as follows:  Transitional arrangements-Transitioning from war to peace.  Restoration-Restoring basic infrastructure and human capacity development.  Policy development-Developing policies that will reflect change and a new and improved way of doing things.  Developing Capacity- Addressing human capacity gaps to implement new and improved systems.

2. What are AET good practices in higher education as related to post-conflict situations?

Good practices in AET for institutions

For an institution to develop a well-structured and organized system, it must have:

 a clear vision, objectives (an agreed strategic plan) that are focused on skills development and service delivery to the society;  management tools (administration, finance and academic) for good governance; and  transparent implementation procedures (communication, monitoring and evaluation) for accountability

Prioritization of best practices for institutions:

 Consensus of all stakeholders (participatory approach)  Periodical update of objectives according to needs (curriculum, research and outreach programs)  Financial management (timely reporting) focused on sustainability

Good practices in AET for the donor community:

 Needs assessment/institutional analysis- There is a need for donors to conduct a needs assessment of the host country before implementation of projects to ascertain priority areas. Institutional analysis spells out short-term and long-term goals of the institution.  Participatory prioritization of areas of intervention-Inclusiveness of beneficiaries in determining areas of intervention.  Addressing special needs of gender and disabled in the rebuilding processes- Gender affirmative actions are needed to include female participation in rebuilding processes. Lessons learned from women coping with conflict should be drawn upon to participate in post-conflict efforts. The disabled should be provided for under the law and incorporated into developmental initiatives.  Sharing experiences with similar post-conflict countries- Post-conflict countries should be encouraged to continue sharing experiences and lessons learned as much as possible to develop a road map towards uniting efforts to rebuild their countries  Strategic engagement of local and/or national organizations in the implementation of the interventions for sustainability and long term impacts.  Partnerships with clear and complimentary roles-From the initial stages of the project, key players and their roles should be spelled out so that everyone is clear about their participation and involvement.

Good practices for government:

 Political will and commitment to invest in AET (budget and support); designating incentive mechanisms for attracting and retaining senior qualified manpower in AET institutions  Clear policy framework and investment plan to create opportunities for employment creation/economic opportunities  Participatory policy and planning processes involving key stakeholders  Skill improvement programs (alternative carrier paths)  Representative governance, transparency, management and advisory bodies (think tank); Flexible membership based on requirement  Genuine dialogue on grievances and issues  Clear recognition of contribution of different groups to development; changing mindsets  Affirmative action for gender  Policies for investment

3. What are recommendations for strategies to cope with post-conflict with focus on what would be appropriate the South Sudan?

The workshop recommended the following copping strategies in post-conflict countries for agriculture in higher education:

For government:  Policy advocacy, policy formulation and lobbying  Strategic planning development and financing  Plan and provide support to areas of intervention  Support investment plan in higher education on agriculture

For AET higher education systems:  Support for institutional strategic plan  Institutions are clear about where they want to go and in what time frame

Any support to institutions should be made to the strategic planning in the following areas:  Building human capacity- long term and short term trainings should be encouraged to address capacity gaps  Building infrastructures: labs, ICT, libraries  Developing of curriculum for various programs  Linkages-Establishing linkages with regional and international institutions  Exchange professional visits- Encourage faculty exchange as hands on experience geared towards experience sharing and improving systems

4. What are the priority collaborative researchable AET topics needed to be addressed that will increase AET capacity in higher education systems in post-conflict situations?

A key outcome of the workshop was to build a learning agenda for innovATE and its partners. To determine the key researchable topic related to AET in post-conflict, each working group was asked to develop a list of the most important topics. The following topics below are the combined lists of the 10 t priority researchable topics generated by the three work groups. This list was edited for clarity and some points were combined. The participants then ranked the full list. This list will form the basis for a presentation at innovATE’s organized international AET symposium to be conducted on September 2013. The list will help define future research and outreach AET activities to be conducted by innovATE and its partners.

The number in the bracket defines the average ranking given on by the participants (where 1 was given the highest priority, and 10 the lowest priority by the participants). a. ICT for Agricultural Technology

(That can also contribute immensely in career choice opportunity, teaching, research and agri-business.) b. Socio-economic issues

 Gender issues in education higher education and public sector  Student support mechanisms  Contribution of education as peace and factor (nation, governance and democracy, tolerance, etc.)  Land use (land tenure issues)

c. Innovations in agriculture and technology/ Technical and agricultural issues including:  Increase agricultural productivity (seed, fertilizer application, IPM)  Improve indigenous knowledge and technology in areas of postharvest, ethnobotany (folklore medicine, food, new crops,) to also encompass biology and economic significance)  Processing and value techniques (incubator initiatives)  Research in commodity value chain for agriculture  Agri-business and entrepreneurship in areas of marketing, agri-chain management, horticultural and agricultural exports

d. Action research process to understand the change processes occurring and their impacts e. Gender-related impacts of conflict and how to handle them

 capacities to handle coping mechanisms of stresses of war (coping mechanisms)  opportunities as related to gender responsibilities  best-practices in mainstreaming gender in high education f. AET curricula that flexibly (home grown solutions) address emerging issues g. Studies (authentic) on human resource capacity gaps h. Food security i. Climate change j. Actual basic scientific research on agriculture

“Building agricultural education and training capacity in post-conflict countries: case studies from South Sudan and Sub-Saharan Africa” held in Kampala, Uganda - August 2013

Ranking of researchable topics

This is the list of top priority research areas and the summary of the rankings given to this list by the participants.

Researchable topics Summary ranking

ICT for Agricultural Technology 5

Socio-economic issues 4

Innovations in agriculture and technology/Technical 1 and agricultural issues

Action Research process to understand changes 6 processes and impacts

Gender-related impacts of conflict and how to handle 8

them

AET curricula that flexibly (home grown solutions) 2 address emerging issues

Studies on human resource capacity gaps 3

Actual basic scientific research on agriculture 9

Food security 7

Climate change 10

Appendices

Agenda for the workshop with workshop objectives Pages 13 and 14

Pre-workshop questions - summary of responses Pages 15 -16

Workshop registration sheet Page 20

Guidelines for presentation of case studies Page 21

Post-conflict AET capacity building worksheets (3) Pages 22, 23, and 24

Workshop participants with contact information Pages 25 - 29

Building agricultural capacity in post-conflict countries: case studies from South Sudan and Sub-Saharan Africa

A workshop held at the Sheraton Kampala Hotel, Kampala, Uganda Workshop Agenda

Tuesday, 20 August 2013 – DAY ONE Start End Presenter or moderator 9:00 9:45 Welcome and Introductions Workshop participants 9:45 10:05 Background for Conference Tom Hammett 10:05 10:30 Putting post conflict in context Mike Bertelsen 10:30 11:00 Registration, set-up and tea 11:00 11:30 The Team Africa - regional case study Hamidou Boly 11:30 12:00 The FARA perspective - regional case study Clesensio Tizikara 12:00 12:30 Rwanda - country case study A Daniel Thomas 12:30 13:30 Lunch, discussion 13:30 14:00 Rwanda - country case study B Juvénal Nshimiyimana 14:00 14:45 South Sudan - country perspective U. of Juba delegation 14:45 15:15 Ethiopia - country case study Jemal Yousuf Hassen 15:15 15:30 Tea/Coffee Break 15:30 15:45 Discussion - Working Group Assignments Tom Hammett 15:45 17:00 Working groups meet 17:00 18:00 Free time/work on your own 18:00 19:30 Working dinner

Wednesday, 21 August 2013 – DAY TWO 9:00 9:15 Review of Day One and Plan for Day Two Tom Hammett Working groups present summary of 9:15 10:15 discussion held on Day One 10:15 10:45 RUFORUM – regional case study Sylvia Chinime-Mkandawire 10:45 11:00 Tea/Coffee Break 11:00 11:30 Liberia - country case study Mardea Varkpeh 11:30 12:00 Gender in the post-conflict context Maria Mullei 12:00 13:00 Lunch 13:00 14:45 Working groups meet 14:45 15:00 Tea Break 15:00 15:15 Working groups prepare presentations 15:15 16:30 Working group present findings – Day Two 16:30 16:45 What are the next steps? Tom Hammett 16:45 17:00 Workshop closing Moilinga /Hammett/Bertelsen 17:00 18:00 Working groups synthesize findings

Key objectives of the workshop:

1. By examining case studies we will develop written summaries of approaches and identify good practices taken to rebuild capacity for providing agricultural higher education in several post-conflict countries in Africa;

2. Document workshop dialogue on approaches to agricultural capacity building in African post-conflict countries; and

3. Produce guidelines on post-conflict agricultural capacity building and priorities for a learning agenda that includes good practices authored by the participants of the workshop.

Meeting notes:

During the workshop we will discuss and document examples of agriculture education capacity building (constraints, opportunities, good practices) in post-conflict areas.

We will use the case study method to encourage discussion and interaction. The country and regional case study presentations listed above will be short – around 20 minutes. The remainder of the time will be used for discussion.

Each participant will bring from their country or organization printed and/or digital copies of agricultural education resources, papers, and post-conflict reports to share. Posters, slide presentations, and other exhibits are encouraged and welcomed, and will be presented or displayed as time and space permits.

Building agricultural capacity in post-conflict countries:

Case studies from South Sudan and Sub-Saharan Africa Kampala, Uganda - 20-21 August, 2013 Workshop registration sheet

Name: ______

Position: ______

Work address: ______

______

Email: ______

Office phone: ______

FAX: ______Mobile: ______

Name colleagues who should be involved in the AET Network (Please use back of this page if you need more space.):

1. Name: ______

Contact information (email): ______

2. Name: ______

Contact information (email): ______

3. Name: ______

Contact information (email): ______

Building agricultural capacity in post-conflict countries:

Case studies from South Sudan and Sub-Saharan Africa Kampala, Uganda - 20-21 August, 2013 Help us build the AET network!

What are your expectations of this workshop? ______

____ (responses are summarized on the following pages) ______

What do you expect to gain from the workshop? ______

What is one important thing that you wish to share with the other participants at this workshop? ______

Building agricultural capacity in post-conflict countries: Case studies from South Sudan and Sub-Saharan Africa Kampala, Uganda - 20-21 August, 2013 A summary of responses to the pre-workshop questions found on the rear of the workshop registration sheet:

1. What are your expectations of this workshop?

 I expect that post-conflict countries will share lessons learnt from building agricultural capacities in their own countries.  That the academic concepts about AET are tackled, and that the best proposed solutions for the adoption of new institutional and individual linkages are established.  To find solutions to agricultural practices in South Sudan for it is still a new nation (discovering ways forward in agricultural practices in higher education)  Discovering ways forward to build agricultural capacity in post- conflict South Sudan.  To share the best and reliable experiences for post-conflict higher education capacity rebuilding.  To learn first-hand about the experiences of other post-conflict countries, their challenges, and how they solved and/or are solving them.  To ferret out issues of the role in agricultural education.  That the lessons learnt from the workshop would impact policy making in my country.  To have a network for exchange on agricultural educators – where we will put together our experiences.

2. What do you expect to gain from the workshop?

 How to manage minimum resources to achieve maximum results.  The role of general and higher education in enhancing agricultural productivity and production in post-conflict countries like South Sudan.  To learn experiences in other conflict affected countries in Africa and the larger world.  To learn more about agricultural practices in the South Sudan and other countries.  A new way of thinking about higher education in post-conflict countries in preventing conflicts through education services and delivery.  How institutions can effectively link up with development partners in order to work together with the government to tackle post-conflict challenges.  The strategy of building agricultural capacity in post-conflict situations.  How other post-conflict countries and nations succeeded.  How different institutions deal with challenges from conflict situations—what kind of agricultural education and training countries need.

3. What is one important thing that you wish to share with the other participants at this workshop?

 Training and educating nationals to seek and set priorities and solutions in AET.  That it will take an ‘all hands on deck’ approach to achieve the results that we want because we all have a responsibility to ourselves, our community and our nation.  The importance of food processing and preservation and that South Sudan needs help from other countries to improve on their food processing.  The continental policy toward supporting higher education in Africa and the need to share experiences throughout Africa.  FARA’s new strategic plan 2014-18 and experiences in post- conflict South Sudan.  Personal experiences in South Sudan after the conflict on food production.  The importance of vision and strategic planning.  Rethinking agricultural educational curricula, content, context, and methods of delivery.  Listing innovative thinking as the driving force of our educational systems and that these institutions should act as hubs of knowledge.  Building a peaceful, tolerant environment in education after conflict situations.

Forms: a. Guidelines for case study presentations Building agricultural capacity in post-conflict countries:

Case studies from South Sudan and Sub-Saharan Africa Kampala, Uganda - 20-21 August, 2013 Talking Points

Here are a few talking points that will help you direct and organize your comments during your country case study presentation:

1. What is the historical perspective of the conflict? (Give the who, what, where, and how)

2. What were the consequences of the conflict on education in general and agriculture higher education in particular? (for example, the impacts on agriculture production, on agriculture technology, etc.)

3. What were the country-level strategies to meet these challenges?

4. What were the results of these strategies thus far? What has worked and what has not worked? And why?

5. What are the expectations for the future? Country-wide? At the institutional level? For individuals such as yourself and your colleagues?

Forms: Workshop task sheets (1 of 3)

Building agricultural capacity in post-conflict countries:

Case studies from South Sudan and Sub-Saharan Africa Kampala, Uganda - 20-21 August, 2013

Working group tasks – sheet #1 Objective: Examine and summarize country case studies to identify good practices taken to rebuild capacity for providing agricultural higher education

Questions to be addressed include:

1. What challenges that education systems in the region need to overcome in post-conflict environment? 2. What were the consequences of the conflict situation for the agriculture sector (production, technical, etc.)? 3. What are the approaches (strategies) to meet post-conflict challenges to agricultural capacity building? (Coping with post- conflict challenges to AET capacity) 4. What are the results thus far? What has worked and why? What has not worked and why?

Outputs/products will include:

1. List of challenges to AET capacity that are unique among the countries represented in your group 2. List of successful strategies by country/case study

Working group tasks – sheet #2 Objective: Document workshop dialogue on approaches to agricultural capacity building in African post-conflict countries

1. In the context of these post-conflict challenges what are the good practices that have emerged?

2. What are the expectations for the future?

 What is needed at the government level? What about policies?

 How will institutions and organizations be best involved?

 What is needed from individuals?

3. What is needed from the private sector? How best for the private sector to be involved?

4. How is higher education related to primary, education, secondary education, youth, and work force development programs? Outputs/products include:

1. Report back to general group including list of expectations, strategies for getting private sector involved and interactions with other levels of AET (primary, secondary, work force, etc.)

Working group tasks– sheet #3

Goal: Produce guidelines for a research program on post-conflict agricultural capacity building and priorities for a AET learning agenda that includes good practices

Outputs:

1. Define a researchable topic to study supported by innovATE

2. Organize a team to conduct this research

3. Suggest services to be provided by the AET community of practice

4. Report back to the other participants

Be mindful of the anticipated workshop outputs:

1. Synthesize input for presentation at the innovATE organized AET Symposium to be held in September

2. Produce the final written report that synthesizes the results of the workshop

3. Distribute the results of this workshop

List of workshop attendees

Jemal Yousuf Hassen (PhD) Assistant Professor and Head of Department Department of Rural Development & Agri. Extension Haramaya University P. O. Box 108 DireDawa, Haramaya, Ethiopia Office: +251(0) 25 55 30 403 Mobile: +251 (0) 9 15 76 84 63 Email: [email protected]

Dr. Bernard Bashaasha Principal College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences (CAES) Makerere University P. O. Box 7062 Kampala, Uganda Office: 0414-54-22 -77 Mobile: 0722-262-07249 Email: [email protected]

Prof. Adipala Ekwamu Executive Secretary Regional Universities Forum for Capacity Building in Agriculture (RUFORUM) Makerere University P. O. Box 7062 Kampala, Uganda Office: +256-414-535939 Fax: +256414534153 Mobile: +256 772601875 Website: www.ruforum.org Blog: http://ruforum.wordpress.com/ Email: [email protected]

Mr. Pasquale Tiberio Moilinga Dean College of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies University of Juba Juba, South Sudan Mobile: +211-956-100102 or +211-912-905717 Email: [email protected]

Mrs. Sylvia Chindime-Mkandawire Program Officer – Training and Quality Regional Universities Forum for Capacity Building in Agriculture (RUFORUM) Makerere University Campus P.O. Box 7062 Kampala, Uganda Office: +256-414-535939 Fax: +256-414-534153 Mobile: +256-783-690267 Website: www.ruforum.org Email: [email protected]

Prof. Hamidou Boly TEAM-Africa coordinator P.O. Box 1091 Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso Office: +226 70151212 Mobile: +226-756-09912 Email: [email protected]

Dr. Nshimiyimana Juvénal Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs Institute Polytechnic de Byumba P.O. Box 25 Byumba, Rwanda Mobile: +250-788-306489 Email: [email protected]

Dr. Clesensio Tizikara Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) No. 12 Anmeda Street, Roman Ridge PMB CT 173 Accra, Ghana Office: +233-302-772823 / 779421 Fax: +233-302-773676 Mobile: +233-263-578525 or +256-752-408636 Website: www.fara-africa.org Email: [email protected]

Mrs. Mardea Varkpeh Partner Liaison Officer USAID EHELD Project RTI International between 11th and 12th Streets, Sinkor, Payne Avenue Monrovia, Liberia Office: +231-777-545-056 Mobile: +231-886-545-056 Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

Mr. Njirushwa Rukazambuga Daniel Thomas Academic staff - Associate Professor National University of Rwanda P.O. Box 117 Butare, Huye District Southern Province, Rwanda Office: +250-252-530288 Email: [email protected]

Mr. Peter Gama Assistant Professor Department of Agricultural Sciences College of Natural Resources of Environmental Studies University of Juba P.O. Box 82 Juba, South Sudan Office: +211-929-098511 Email: [email protected]

Mr. Milton Melingasuk Lado Farm Manager University of Juba P.O. Box 82 Juba, South Sudan Mobile: 095-697-7876 Email: [email protected]

Mrs. Sauda Dehuya Suleiman Lecturer University of Juba Juba, South Sudan Mobile: +211 095-6480041 Email: [email protected] or [email protected] 28

Dr. Leonzio Onek Associate Professor College of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies University of Juba P.O. Box 82 Juba, South Sudan Mobile: +211-955-003400 Email: [email protected]

Mr. Tony Macinnes Alfred Ngalamu Lecturer Department of Agricultural Sciences College of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies University of Juba P.O. Box 82 Juba, South Sudan Mobile: +211-955-838370 Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

Mrs. Maria Mullei RHEA Chief of Party University of Juba P. O. Box 82 Juba, South Sudan Email: [email protected]

Mr. Simon Byabagambi Agronomist/ Program Management Specialist US Agency for International Development US Mission Compound, South Wing Plot 1577 Ggaba Road, Nsmabya P.O. Box 7856 Kampala, Uganda Office: 256-414-306-001 ext. 6554 Fax: 256-414-306-535 Mobile: 072-213-8473 Web: http://uganda.usaid.gov Email: [email protected]

Mr. Jeff Waldon Director of Environmental Affairs and Chief of Staff for Africa Kissito Healthcare International 12 Stocks St. Lovettsville, VA, 20180 USA Office: 540-230-2854 or in Uganda +256-078-4123907 Fax: 540-265-0305 Mobile: 540-230-2854 Website: www.kissito.org Skype: jeff.waldon Email: [email protected]

Dr. Mike Bertelsen Director Office of International Research, Education & Development (OIRED) The International Affairs Offices (IAO) 526 Prices Fork Road Blacksburg, VA, 24060 USA Office: 540-231-6338 Fax: 540-231-2439 Email: [email protected]

Dr. Tom Hammett Program Director Innovation for Agricultural Training and Education (InnovATE) 526 Prices Fork Road Blacksburg, VA, 24060 USA Office: 540-231-2716 Email: [email protected]