1. CRP 1.1 and 1.2 - Take home messages
 Areas of focus: Crop live stock interactions vs biomass; decision making; trade-offs
agro-biodiversity and system intensification; intensification vs environment
 Consensus that a livelihood focus is most appropriate
 Added value of trade-off analysis when applied to data being collected
 We should not get stuck in characterization; we should activate learning and
feedback loops (‘quick’ feedback based on participatory reflections)
 Various methods exist (quantitative + participatory); how to operationalize these?
How do we integrate across scales?
 It’s easy to get complex; we should not overcomplicate – use simple tools as
possible; how much extra are we going to learn by getting more complex; simple but
not simplistic
 Communication and engagement of stakeholders on trade-off analysis (e.g., scenario
approach)
 Lots of advance to bring linkages between CRPs and Centers – are donors
perceiving this change?

2. CRP 1.1 and 1.2 - What next?
Immediate
 Summary of the meeting – capture thoughts and discussions
 Presentations available
 Integrate trade-off issues in the planning meetings
 Inform the choice of Action Sites (for data collection) – IPG nature
 Inventory of tools available (web-site)
 Half page news piece for the Consortium newsletter
Later (but still soon)
 Establish a way forward for continuing interactions on trade-off analysis; we should
organize ourselves before being organized towards concrete outputs
 Capacity/human resources to use the variety of tools within the CRPs
 Identify common sites for co-learning across CRPs
 Integration of tools between scales
 How do we measure learning from interacting with partners on trade-offs
 Share learning about operationalization of trade-off analysis
Later (within 1-2 years)
 International conference (science) or a session within an international meeting (e.g.
International Farming System Design meeting)
 Expose progress to GCARD (partnerships and politics)