So Dr Krista Jacobs. I want to, first
of all, thanks for having hung in there with
us during the federal shutdown. Uh Yeah, we
just never knew for sure how it was going to
go. And in the end she is doing the
closing address so that if she wasn't going to be
able to make it, we could have facilitated closing
address conversation with you. But she was willing to
stay in there and I'm not even allowed to check
my email. Can't representation. I can't access my
like you can't do anything. So we're very happy
that in the end she was able to come.
So Dr Jacobs is a senior gender advisor
for the Bureau, Food Security uh The Country Strategy
Implementation Officer USA uh which coordinates U. S.
Government People Future Program which funds the research that in
my office that we've done different innovation labs. That
, among other things, she's developing economists whose work
focuses on gender, food security and assets. Current
research work includes advising agricultural projects on gender, immigration
program, evaluation, developing methods to measure women's and
men's land and assets rights, building gender capacity of
community based programs and building the monitoring and evaluation capacity
of local civil society organisations. Her work is focused
in East and West Africa and of course you've heard
a lot more about during the careers panel. So
you have a sense of things CBC and refugees before
she owns a PhD in agricultural and resource economics from
the University of California Davis. Thank you everyone for
me first. Thank you to Marie ELISA who really
did everything in her power to make sure that I
could still come here as long as the government was
open and just the flexibility of thank you to all
of you for making this such a fun and insightful
Klay jail conference. So I accepted the triple challenge
of summarizing and synthesizing the themes and conversations we've been
having of providing a donor perspective and linking all of
that to be the futures work Engender. So we'll
see how I do. I justify slides last night
and then throughout today I just scribbling more and more
knows of oh there's something else to talk about that's
coming up. Um so probably won't get through everything
but please feel free to ask questions and I'll be
available after this. So I look forward to more
and more conversation. I'll start first a quick overview
. I will be the future. Just highlight the
basics. I want everyone to the website. If
you're not familiar with the initiative, It is the
US. government's global hunger and food security initiative.
We have 12 target countries. We work in many
more countries than that. Um Was launched in 2010
. We are in our second phase of the Future
. And that phase is led by the Global Food
Security Strategy. It's really ignited by the strategy document
, which is also online and for three overarching objectives
in that strategy, inclusive and sustainable agricultural growth,
strength and resilience among people and systems and a well
nourished population, especially among women and Children. And
then we have, I want to say at least
six cross cutting intermediate results. And of course that
is where gender is along with youth and policy and
environment. And so there we have increased gender equality
and empowerment and it really is in the strategy and
among my colleagues among our partners more than lip service
. There's a recognition if you want to have this
agricultural library, you want your systems, you want
nutrition, you need to have women and men of
all ages, you know, and also to economic
sciences research, well resourced informed able to make decisions
leading innovative participating, some high level results so far
From 2010 to 2017 23.4 million more people living above
the poverty line in areas where we work 3.4 million
Children for you, stunting With all of our partners
. When you do in this room, you've developed
and employed over 900 innovations in agriculture and nutrition.
Please don't ask me the names of all and our
partners yields are higher than the national average yield.
So we're getting there in agricultural productivity in some of
this agricultural growth and then some of these nutrition outcomes
. It's not only us we do not claim hole
responsibility and attribution for these results, but we're happy
to see that where we are. We're also seeing
progress at the same time. So that's overall What
does gender integration and women's empowerment to look like in
the future? So I want to talk a little
bit about just how gender immigration works at U.
S. A. And in the future. Some
of this is a bit idealized, but this is
the general process. Um, and I hope that
time began then explained that like everything that goes wrong
keeps me up at night. It's a little bit
more of the reality of that process. Buy us
a policy. Every project that we do need to
be informed by a gender analysis. Whether that happens
during USA is process of designing what our request for
proposals will look like or that happens early on in
the project. That is the requirement. So everything
that we have been talking about in terms of access
to resources, who's controlling the income? What's decision
making look like? How is time being spent?
What policies are there that are affecting all this?
What our power dynamics were damaged in the race,
violence. Um, Those are all supposed to be
coming into an analysis that informs our design process.
Sometimes that happens more than others. We've gotten good
at getting those, getting this analysis informing high level
strategies but less good at specific project specific activities.
And that's something I can talk about later. We
also in a big part of my role is providing
technical guidance, capacity building and totals. So gender
advisers like me go out to USa missions. Sometimes
we go out to partners and we talk with them
to help you try to figure out what should your
gender priorities be As you're designing the projects that you
want partners to do or you've got a livestock project
that you're designing? What do you mean? What
do you need to be asking? And who do
you need to be talking to to do a gender
analysis for that? We're working on a brief and
a tool to lay out that process for people and
hoping to get some case studies for it. We
also, I saw Daniels and jennifer's um slides,
the intervention guide and I even heard you mentioned the
gym, my heart soared. So those are tools
we have to say, let's have a conversation to
help you prioritize of everything. We're measuring with Julia
, the Lexus segregated indicators. One of the things
that make sense for your project to work on.
Let's pick two or three because you're not gonna be
able to do everything in a, for your project
with limited funding. So let's have that conversation and
then with the intervention guys that's organized in such a
way that if you decide, you know what we
really want to work on improving equitable control over income
. Well, here are some things that other projects
have done, that. Here's what that looked like
. Here's some guiding questions here. Some potential.
So part of my job is making people aware of
these tools, helping them to use them. We
do have impact evaluations that consider gender sometimes as part
of a broad project evaluation. Uh, look at
all. Did you have a gender action plan?
Did you have expertise? How were your indicators?
Did you you know, what was your participation of
women in your farmers groups looking like? That's okay
. And that's useful. We've had a few more
that are specifically looking at projects. We're trying to
have a gender or we were thinking there might be
some changes in dynamics. So we have done impact
evaluations on what happens in Zambia as we think we're
seeing increased commercialization of the ground tent. How are
changes, you know, what is happening in terms
of who's controlling management decisions, who's doing the labor
, what kinds of inputs are used? Who is
selling to where and how cooperative those decisions are.
We have another that was an innovative project in Tanzania
where they said we are going to try these kind
of informal labour fooling groups and see what that does
for women's and men's workloads and if that is saving
them time and if it is, how are they
using that time? We talked a lot about the
area and sexist aggregated indicators and I can feel on
and on about that forever. But there are a
couple of points I want to make. Okay.
One is, it's been, I want to give
everyone throughout the future shape credit for the sexist aggravated
years. That has not been an easy process to
get those indicators collected to get them collective in a
clean and beautiful way. It sounds like it's very
simple like, Oh well, just ask how many
women came and how many men came for beneficiaries are
. It's not, it involves a lot of change
in all of our partners and many practices. It
involves understanding what those categories mean. So it's it's
a bigger deal than it sounds like that. We
have sex disaggregated data and in terms of the reach
benefit of power framework, it's really only in the
past five years or so for the future that we
have the ability to say, what is our gender
reach of our programs before? We couldn't say that
we weren't looking at that. So we would be
assuming we've got all these great, you know,
they got all these great programs are going out into
the field. They're totally gender aware and we just
have to say we didn't know who they were actually
talking about that. We've been able to look more
and more in that data in the past few years
. Um So here is some of that data is
very high level results That we have because of the
sex disaggregated indicators and Julia. So in 2017 Alone
3.6 million women apply new technologies and practices in agriculture
could be the future. I can tell the story
behind that number. That's for later. Mm At
least$1 billion 2014. And every year since 2014
, we've had at least 400,000 women farmers and women
businesses received From the we now that we have two
data points um from our baseline in 2011 2012 and
another set In, 2015 2016. We can see
that where we worked. 3.7 more, 3.7 million
more women Had a bit of departing decisions, decisions
over that time period, 3.3 million more women have
reasonable workloads and 2.6 million more women had access to
. So we are seeing at least with reach that
we're getting there, were also able to look at
some of our heart. So what a lot of
you in this room know what the future programming looks
like on the ground. Um So how did we
get to some of these? What are our comments
? Kind of modes of reaching people and especially reaching
women. We tend to do a lot through groups
, whether that's village savings and loan associations, whether
that is producer associations or cooperatives, or whether that's
just straight women's groups. That tends to be how
we reach both men and women, but especially women
, through that organizing principle. We don't necessarily,
so you know, how active are they in those
groups? Is this a collaborative and connective and empowering
experience for them or are they just going to the
groups to get? But we do know that we're
reaching the theaters. We also do lots of training
. Indeed talk about different modes of extension where doing
all of those. We've got the farmer field schools
were working with extension systems to make them more gender
aware of public and private. It's all, it's
all in there. There's been a lot of push
to get women financial services, whether that is through
, you know, village based input agents who also
act as you know, predators. Whether that is
digital financial services. Getting finance to women, farmers
and small businesses has been another emphasis and I suspect
will continue to grow. We also are hold in
not just the production of the marketing. So how
can we link with farmers, women entrepreneurs to fires
? How can we help them to aggregate to get
better prices and better terms whether that is through cooperatives
, whether that is getting women to marketing days,
whether that is working, funding women's micro enterprises together
together to get them better access to financial services and
have thanks to more willing to take that long.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Mhm. So now
I'll probably be hopping back and forth between conference themes
and the future. I think it's two schizophrenic.
So in part of part of my role in the
future is to help my colleagues who range from economists
and agronomists and livestock specialists and market specialists and insurance
people and add people and nutrition people have a conflict
person now, which is super cool. Help them
to think about the people and the institutions who are
involved in agriculture and a lot of that is putting
yourself in someone else's shoes and also choosing your house
. So these are my gender analysis, basic questions
that I'm going to make sure every time I talk
with you and your designing a project, what were
, you know, the information we need? We
touched on pretty much all of these, you know
, throughout this conference, um who has, what
resources, what are they doing with them? What
are they getting from those resources and the time we're
spending? Who is it? Who's deciding how all
of this is happening? And who don't you see
? So we talked about land access and control over
land with Doctor Dear. We've talked about the flow
of information with exemption systems. We've talked a lot
about control over income and who's at the table and
who are programs are reaching. And we're talking with
research as well. So what's been fun for me
in the conference is to take a step back and
I think a bit more about whose voices are in
our programming and research and whose needs to be.
So the questions that were coming out for me are
how are we listening and amplifying what's existing on the
ground? Who are we in this process because we
are not coming in as completely clean and independent and
pure actors. Um and then my apologies to the
planet Miranda, who's telling the story and what does
that mean for now? So I'll talk about a
little of these. Try to not get too philosophical
. Well, yeah. So with how are we
listening and amplifying? We've talked a lot about are
we coming in with these are measurements? This is
how we do research and how does that interplay with
people's lived experiences and what's important to them? How
do we capture that And how do we bring these
together? Whether that is through participatory research, community
led research, That's a different set of skills for
me than, you know, my traditional background of
the survey. And that's a different way for donors
as well as you think so, Yeah. So
then who are we? And this has been really
fun. I appreciated your talk and also cakes.
She's not here thinking about how to behave in the
field and what are some of those challenges that we've
all experienced as researchers and practitioners were kind of the
other, but we don't want to be and we're
walking into a historical context and bringing our own context
as well. So how can we be more,
more and more aware of that? But at the
same time, I think one of the things that
research has to offer and good and then he has
to offer is this ability to leverage that otherness and
take a step back to see what are the larger
patterns that we who are not always directly involved?
What can we see the larger patterns in terms of
how people are interacting and bringing a bringing data and
evidence in? Yes, it's in more traditional ways
, not necessarily participatory, but we can bring those
sort of research skills and that outsider perspective to the
table to see new patterns and also to test our
assumptions. So when I started in gender and land
, if you would read the literature, if you
were to just go around and talk to people,
you would think that men had all the lands and
all the assets that they owned, everything and women
absolutely nothing. Mhm. And you would also think
that everybody knows the customary system and everyone knows the
laws and we know how things go when you talk
to people and when you collect data, you find
out then have about this much the smoking. Yes
, there's a gap, but it's not really like
that. Most people don't know what their own customary
rules are around and where they're living. So we
have that ability to contribute no leverage that otherness,
we can't get rid of agreement as well. Use
it to, you know, to bring in a
perspective that can be useful. Um some of that
is there? Um Yeah, I do. I
wanted to say a little bit about indicators, we've
talked a lot about, we can do mixed methods
. We've talked a lot about these are this is
one set of measures of empowerment and then there are
other more local and how we could have married to
you don't have to choose. I realized that I
realized, I'm saying this is a donor resources are
limited, but there's no reason to only do a
qualitative survey or to only do a conserve a these
. They bring different things. So I don't think
it's either or I will say my experience working into
donor organizations and supporting another as a consultant. People's
lived experiences move people in organizations, high level standardized
indicators, move institutions and move money. I can't
make an argument in Congress to get repeated years of
funding without quantitative indicators doesn't work. I'm getting time
. So I will move on. One of the
big shifts in the global food security strategy is how
the future is conceptualizing. We're moving from kind of
a value chain and production centric approach to an agricultural
food systems approach. And we were always working outside
smallholder production. So we were always working in processing
, in marketing in trade and input services and policy
. But the way we were telling our story was
about smallholder productivity and for gender, this meant that
we were pretty much talking about what are gender dynamics
in farming households, even though we know that there's
a lot more so with this shift more deliberately thinking
and talking about agricultural systems, that means we've got
more releases more people and more interactions. So we've
got all of these different categories of people and these
interactions. We need to be thinking about who is
present in each of these different categories. How is
information flowing within the categories? Between the categories?
And we know it's flowing in a gender way.
What is the power dynamic? you know, not
just between women and men but between harbors and aggregators
processors and transporters whoever and what are different incentives in
these systems. Yeah. Yeah. Mhm. Okay
. That also means kind of conceptual. We need
to think about gender in more places than we have
been and think about how what do we need to
be, how do we need to be measuring empowerment
differently in agricultural employment than in smallholder production? Maybe
we can keep some of the themes maybe they're not
appropriate. one of the things that we're starting to
grapple with more U. S. Aid is as
we're moving towards the system, the system is thinking
and as we're moving more towards engaging with the private
sector, whether that's local, local small medium and
large companies and international companies, what is our role
or what can our role be in fostering a private
sector and engaging the private sector so that they view
women, men, girls and boys as suppliers,
consumers, innovators, managers, leaders, because it's
going to be the private sector that's going to create
the sustainability that we want. But they have their
own set of incentives. They have their own gender
dynamics that they are bringing as well. So we're
trying to think about what does our goal needs to
be so that we can create or at least encourage
that facility. Yeah. Hi. So we do
have the global food security strategy. We also have
a global Pretty research strategy because we love strategies.
Yeah. Have a little bit of an excerpt here
and then talk about this on the next page.
So to provide a pipeline of innovative scalable products and
practices the company contextual information, to optimize the allocation
of scaling of research outputs or economic opportunity, nutrition
resilience, basically what this means to me. Um
we've invested a lot in developing these new technologies and
practices right? And now we're shifting towards but we
really want people to be applying but that means we
need to be thinking about technologies and practices for who
whose problems are we trying to solve that? Who
makes that decision? And are we engaging the people
whose problems that we're trying? You know, we're
trying to solve and I'm thinking of the pre Columbian
picture like no work solvers, but this is how
the future works. Um you know, are we
engaging those people that we think, you know this
is going to be helpful to you or you also
grow Sorghum, you know, as a small holder
, are we engaging you? Mhm. We do
that a lot through our innovation labs and through our
values are larger valuation projects. So are small scale
irrigation information lab has really done a lot to involve
women and women and men as couples in the design
, the piloting and testing feedback of small scale irrigation
technologies. This picture is from a project in Tanzania
where we had local innovators and people in villages come
together to design and prototype different. They weren't all
. Mechanization technologies that were also like mushroom gardens,
which turned out to be really popular but to create
these local technologies and link them with local investors and
local financing and ways to kind of make a business
out of the market. Yeah. Mhm. We
so another theme has been a gendered understanding of changes
in agriculture is something we need. So how are
we? So in agriculture and changes through agriculture?
So how our programs, technologies and practices and policies
not only affect data, what people are choosing to
produce and how the agricultural productivity of the environmental sustainability
, environmental effects. How are we? How is
what women and men are choosing to do and able
to do in agriculture through our programs, Whether it
be with training technologies, how is that changing agriculture
is done? How is it changing our help,
the nutrition outcomes? How is it changing but also
how is it changing what women and men are doing
? How is it changing their roles in the field
? How is it changing the choices they make?
How is it changing how they spend their time and
their satisfaction at that time? And also the enormous
experiences as incomes change. As people see, I
can do other roles as mobility changes. How it's
very broad. But all of these has come up
. And one of the things I'm very excited about
is that the the future learning agenda for checking officially
watches in a couple of weeks, but different versions
have been public. We have a gender theme and
agenda in the agenda and these are not the exact
wording of three of our five questions, but the
gist is essentially within our programs. We've seen that
there is a gender gap in application of agricultural technologies
and practices, even though we're pretty much training people
numbers of women in them. So we're seeing this
gap. What's behind it? We have a good
sense from the literature about what that could be.
But in our programs, we want to understand what's
happening and then what are good practices where people have
been able to close that gap in our programs?
And then the question that is near and dear to
my heart is great if we've gotten everyone to adopt
these technologies and practices, what are actually the gender
results of that? And in this conference we talked
a lot about, okay, so how is this
affecting not only productivity, but how is this affecting
how people spend their time? How is suspecting what
the man in the household does, what the woman
in the household does? We've talked a lot about
the burden and a concern about creating more work for
a minute. There was uh I think it's finally
published a study by Pre and the London School University
of London trying to look at agricultural nutrition interventions and
what happened to women's and men's time expenditures and how
they felt about that. And generally it was every
time you do an ag intervention, people are going
to increase their workloads, but people were often happy
, you know, to spend the time to do
something that they thought was worthwhile. So it's something
to think about it. But also to remember just
because people are increasing their team time doesn't mean it's
bad. I see our role development is creating better
options better and more options for people and then finally
hydro Women's and men's application technologies affect the resilience of
nutrition outcomes that we care about. So I'm really
excited that we're finally being able to kind of look
at and test these assumptions that we have about.
You know we're going to have all this great education
, we're going to have all these technologies out.
You know we're going to improve our extension systems but
let's actually see how there's changing people's lives. Um
Well sadly skip my resilience page in favor of the
things I worry about page. So U. S
. A. I. D. And B.
The future our bureaucracies. Um We have different requirements
. We even have a law now for gender.
Um different requirements, different standards, different policies,
each with different degrees of teeth. So I put
them in colors. We have gender LGBT youths,
disability journey to resilience and when it comes down to
designing programming, there are one not always talking with
each other and there's not always the resources to do
them all. So in the lunchtime panel I use
the analogy of I'm on a glacier of the stick
. There are other people on that glacier too.
And we're all trying to move things. So this
means that a lot of the more transformative and the
multifaceted and multidisciplinary yeah okay approaches that we would like
to take to get to empowerment to have gender transformation
are really critical because either all of us have to
work together and prioritize like dr Miller was saying and
how do we do that? Or this is where
it falls apart. Um so it's really you need
to have the right mix of people and tools in
the room first usa and then in the partners and
people who are valuing and seeing, okay, this
is what gender can do for us as we move
into USa takes more of a co creative approach um
with our programming. It's not clear how this is
going to play out. So the idea is to
get more in different voices and local organizations in the
room to have a greater diversity of ideas. But
then we still have to follow all of these all
of these rules and policies. And just another quick
kind of continuing conversation that the gender champions in USA
are regularly checking in on is when are we talking
about women's empowerment? And when are we talking about
gender equity? And are we talking about gender equity
in a way that it is more than an instrument
for women's empowerment? So that's something that that's a
continual conversation that we're having. It, especially it
comes up in my work as well as we're doing
nutrition. We really need to be talking with men
as well and having a more cooperative cooperative approach in
our programming. But it is something that we do
try to have that conversation and with the reach benefit
and power framework. What I like about that framework
is that it's very intuitive. What I'm starting to
see in my own organization is it becomes reach women
benefit women, empower women. And the gender adviser
. My job is to help think about everyone because
everyone has. So that's part of this this tension
that we're facing. So I will stop there and
being excited to take your questions. Yeah, 15
minutes. We are going to say 15 minutes late
Actually questions and then we'll have a 15 minute position
. Mhm Well, that's a greeting. Mhm Uh
huh. You know that's what about security in the
presentation? And I was just kind of curious,
Yeah. Oh food sovereignty and how does that play
their conceptions of the security shit? Yeah. Yeah
. Yes, yes. It's just Mhm. Mhm
. I can do it talk. Okay. I
have a question about country level policy changes and if
you have, if there's any evidence that changes at
that level since the funding is not going to continue
, you have never all teams. Mhm. Okay
. Yeah. Mhm. Yeah, I didn't want
to go back to the user will be very good
programs I would say that I have seen first in
the field, but some of the concerns that women
raised the remote villages of the power. So there's
a project that was just really enhancing these women produce
more vegetables and they really did actually. Their husbands
were not convinced the public law mother convinced they did
. And then by the time they were preparing to
sell their visitor market designed first space was already so
there was nobody to really negotiate or help them collecting
centers were built. So now I decided back Second
kids too. Mine would be is the U.
S. A. Future really hoping for building some
cold stores or helping these women make sure that the
product is being sold in the market. Because this
would be a setback for some of the women.
They really come across nearly five against the culture.
You know sort of we really appreciate that. So
I don't know if you look at that micro level
from the D. C. But hopefully they are
updating the reality of the ground. Uh Yes again
, you know this is one of the good prospects
because clearly you know a lot of problems it's taking
that I've you know you have some problems so go
in in ordering us. So we don't really talk
so much about food sovereignty at us. A um
I would say we certainly as part of agriculturalists growth
were we want people to be able to work in
agriculture and agricultural systems for their consumption and nutrition for
income as one as 1 livelihood and way of being
a cop. I wouldn't necessarily say that you would
promote self food self sufficiency especially as a whole of
government initiative Future has multiple interest usa US to and
Treasury and trade is also something that mm we promote
as part of local markets and export opportunities for the
partners we work with food sovereignty itself is not necessarily
a priority or a language that mhm. We work
very often. Um country level policies. I wish
my policy team colleagues were here. We do work
that country level policies. We have different policies matrices
for all the countries where our mission staff in the
country has worked with the local government to decide what
are going to be some of the more realistic opportunities
to work on a policy. And we do have
an indicator that looks at how they're not, they
don't have to be completed policies. How many steps
have we taken? A lot of the policy topics
we work on our about trade are about seed policy
, which is a very being and big area work
for us. We do and we have to livestock
. In fact, cemetery Bruce safety policies, feed
the future does work some in land policies. Um
Our colleagues in the economic growth, environment and education
you're into that. One of the things that they
do is they have to forget them. It's the
main change. It used to be the Land Policy
Institute in Ethiopia that was part of a year.
They have a different name now. Um but they
are on looking at little stand rights of ways to
change those my feeling um in terms of policy and
gender. And one of the things I try to
encourage is I don't think the countries we work at
the context, we're working in the national level policies
at least for land are the way to go.
Most of the countries we're working and have gender neutral
or at least nominally gender sensitive policies. It's really
implementation local policies, the capacity of your ad ministries
of agriculture, your ministries, land and your administrative
capacities where the rubber meets the road. Four.
Yeah. Mhm for Nepal and I really can't speak
specifically to kiss on. That does sound like the
way the project. No, some of that is
just the timing and how we, our projects and
start up close out. It's like right getting the
next follow on what it's like. But it does
raise this larger question that we should be held accountable
to a sustainability and how do we ensure kind of
where it is a reasonable kind of milestone in 45
Year project to say here's how far we can get
in working with these communities to better link them with
market systems. So one of the things, one
of the reasons I'm excited about learning agenda question and
some work that if pre has done kind of asking
what's next after technology and options is okay. We've
had these, they've been growing the vegetables, they're
starting to get a market and then the project has
well the project isn't going to be able to continue
indefinitely is so how do we then build that capacity
and start to build a building which is during the
project so that but we go away because we will
yeah there are relationships. Mhm mm. Mhm.
Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Mhm. All right
. Mhm. Yeah. Mhm. Yeah. Mhm
. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks
for the question of your tools. Are there any
U. S. A. I. D.
Programs related to agriculture that are not about getting to
market or about increasing you? Yeah. Yes there
are many many future projects. They're not all about
yields to market but many of them are so are
yeah innovation labs and some ways are about doing that
basic research whether varieties of sort of yeah we don't
have a good project that we have. We have
a lasting product and not all of those kind of
technologies are about healed. So our chicken project out
of U. C. Davis is how do we
essentially read? So I get it right throughout tolerant
chickens that are also resistant to Newcastle disease. So
how a lot of our political projects are, how
do we prepare for some of these climate resilience challenges
that we're facing. We also do a lot of
nutrition work as well. So sometimes that social behavior
change, sometimes that is working with households to diversify
their, diversify what they are growing and they're not
natural language trips, sometimes that's working with champion couples
about household planning, envisioning and decision making. So
it really was. Mhm. I engage with the
propensity of thank you very much for your presentation.
Uh I was just wondering if you could talk a
little bit about the role that universities place mentioned,
the innovation labs uh that they play in terms of
the programming and policy and to the future. And
then the second part with how we can best translate
our academic research in some of these projects to be
more useful for us. Yeah. Yeah. I
suggest that the the last question. Unless there's a
burning other question, I don't see people come down
and you want to do a little exercise. Do
we have to My missing a hand? Mhm.
His hand of a hard question. Um So we
do engage with the universities a lot through the innovation
labs in the future. There is a congressional earmarks
about funding that has to go to U. S
. Land Grant universities. So we are always going
to be in Beijing with you in one way or
another. And as the innovation labs and our research
strategy has really been shifting from this, you know
, I don't want to say a focus, but
a lot of work on developing the technology to more
of how do we create these systems that involve research
institutions involved in private sector that involved governments, that
law, civil society to how technologies and practices that
are relevant for women and men that work and that
are adopted to provide a large scale. And that's
something where be the future. At least I remember
meetings and workshops about this review. The future has
recognized we need to be bringing in more of a
social science perspective into our research. It's not just
about, you know, really cool sort of reading
that our colleagues are doing. We also need people
who can do the market research. You can bring
in private sector strategies you believer can get people in
Northern gonna divide to want to buy a particular prints
. That's the interesting and useful perspective to have when
you were trying to understand how do we get these
technologies? How do we get the right technologies there
and how do we get to adopt? So all
of the questions and the conversations we've been having around
well and the ecological research. We need to understand
his lived experiences. We need to talk with people
. We need to be looking at data, you
know, mixed methods, both a large national level
and also download individual level. These are all skills
that we are going to be more as we try
to shift our perspective from we're making and building really
cool technologies to we want to create systems where there
are institutions and relationships that value women and men,
consumers and suppliers and innovators and markets. Market actors
and services. Mhm. Okay. I think that
chest. Yeah. Mhm. Hand first. Popinjay 727 --> A:middle L:90% .