REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS

Innovation Lab for Irrigation and Mechanization

System Research
This RFA is issued by The Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Irrigation and
Mechanization Systems, led by the Robert B. Daugherty Water for Food Global
Institute at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska, United States of America,
for research on:
1. Irrigation service provision
2. Mechanization service provision
3. Agricultural water management in the landscape
4. Innovative finance related to agricultural water management, irrigation and/or
mechanization
5. Capacity needs and capacity strengthening approaches

Date of issue: 2 August 2024

31 October 2024
Deadline for submissions:
16:00 Central Daylight-Saving Time/UTC -5

Applications must be submitted at: https://irrig-mech.piestar-rfx.com/rfps

Submit questions on or before 6 September 2024

To [email protected]
Questions and Answers:
Responses to questions will be posted on 16
September 2024

Minimum 18 months; Maximum 36 months

Performance period:
End date no later than 31 March 2028

Priority countries: Ethiopia, Rwanda, Ghana,

Nepal, Guatemala, Honduras, Zambia, Malawi
Geographic Scope:
Other Feed the Future countries and regional
initiatives will be considered.

Minimum USD$ 150,000

Funding size per project:
Maximum USD$ 800,000

Total funding volume for call: Estimated $10,000,000. The project reserves the
right to not fund up to this amount.
1. Background
The Future Innovation Lab for Irrigation & Mechanization Systems (ILIMS) is a
cooperative agreement sponsored by the US Agency for International Development
(USAID) and led by the Robert B. Daugherty Water for Food Global Institute (DWFI) at
the University of Nebraska (2023-2028). ILIMS aims to generate research-based
evidence to support the growth of vibrant irrigation and mechanization markets, develop
strong institutions and local capacity for sustainability, and foster opportunities for
equitable access, especially for poor and women smallholder farmers. Through
research for development, we contribute to the U.S Government Global Food Security
Strategy (GFSS), responding to the needs of smallholder farmers amid the complexities
of a changing climate and agricultural, market, food, water and energy, and social
systems, in Feed the Future countries (see Section 3).

Accelerated mechanization, including irrigation, can improve agricultural productivity

and profitability, if scaled with a systems approach that minimizes risks to sustainability.
Farm mechanization and services provide economic opportunities with potential for
increased household income, land productivity, and food and nutritional security, as well
as improved resilience to climate change and other shocks. The potential for expanded
mechanized production, including irrigation, is high. Large areas remain where
smallholder farmers can benefit from increased access to equipment and services.
Moreover, within the landscape, improved approaches to agricultural water
management and water resource governance are also needed to enhance resilience.
The potential contribution to the GFSS can only be realized through fostering suitable
conditions and applying technological advancements or other innovations within
agricultural fields and landscapes and market systems.

ILIMS supports applied research that engages stakeholders at multiple levels and can
generate evidence for stronger policies, investments, and practices. Through a
competitive process, the University of Nebraska plans to identify a portfolio of sub-
awards to conduct research focused on scaling suitable irrigation and mechanization
services (on-farm to farm-gate), agricultural water management approaches, and
governance and capacity strengthening.

2. Funding Opportunity
This section describes the expected process and timeline for this RFA.

This Request for Applications is to identify sub-award research partnerships that can
contribute to the ILIMS objectives and GFSS goals. The proposed projects are

1
anticipated to begin in March 2025 and to end on or before 31 March 2028. Proposal
project budgets should not be less than $150,000 and not exceed $800,000. The
number of awards will be determined based on funding available and quality of
proposals.

Full application submissions are due 31 October 2024 at 16:00 Central Daylight-Saving
Time/UTC -5. Evaluation criteria are set forth in Section 6.

The review process will be conducted in two stages:

1. Full application review.
2. Short-listed application review. ILIMS aims to inform short-listed applicants on or
before 25 November 2024. Short-listed applicants will be asked to provide
additional details, which may include information on: project budget, monitoring,
evaluation and learning plans, impact pathways, partner commitments, and other
information relevant to a final selection of successful applications. In addition,
short-listed applicants may be asked to participate in a meeting to present the
project proposal and discuss various aspects of the implementation plan.
Negotiation with successful applicants and award contracting is expected to
begin in December 2024. Project implementation is expected to begin in March
2025, with exact timing to be determined based on the completion of negotiation
and full execution of awards.

3. Eligibility
This section describes the eligibility requirements and preferences, as well as the
activities that are not eligible for funding under this RFA.

Targeted geographic areas

Applicants must target activities in at least one of the following geographic areas:

• Priority countries: Ethiopia, Rwanda, Ghana, Nepal, Guatemala, Honduras,

Zambia, Malawi
• Other Feed the Future countries will be considered

Eligible applicants

• For-profit business with regional/national presence and legal registration in the

proposed country. Private sector applicants must demonstrate experience
working in frontier and developing markets relevant to application.
• Organizations such as research institutions, universities and educational
institutions, commercial businesses, registered farmer cooperatives, consulting

2
 firms, non-profit and non-governmental organizations, and/or business/member
associations.
• Applicants with relevant experience and qualifications to implement the proposed
scope of work and to efficiently manage project tasks.
• At least one partner must be located and legally authorized to work in the target
country.

Additional eligibility criteria

• Consortia and partnerships are encouraged. Consortia are encouraged to include

a private sector partner. Consortia may propose a single lead or a co-lead
arrangement.
• At least one consortium partner must be based in the targeted country.
• Applicants may submit more than one proposal as lead and/or as a consortium
partner.
• Applicants may include one or more countries in a single proposal.
• Lead applicants must have a presence, experience and eligibility to operate
legally in the region and/or country.
• Applicant businesses should have at least one year of experience and existing
commercial viability in proposed technical areas and in the region and/or country.
• Preference will be given to proposals that leverage funds and/or cost share; this
must be measurable and contribute demonstrably to the achievement of desired
results (e.g., financial contributions, unrecovered indirect costs, third party
contributions, donated services, and contribution of various types of property).

Not eligible for funding:

• Pure, upstream, theoretical only academic research (i.e. research and research
outputs that do not aim to contribute in practical way to improvement of irrigation
and mechanization systems in target countries will not be considered).
• Design of new equipment and machinery.
• Equipment procurement and/or construction; proposals that seek to only
import/distribute equipment will not be considered.
• Agricultural commodity procurement
• Restricted commodities and services from ineligible suppliers in accordance with
22CFR228.12 (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2012-title22-vol1/pdf/CFR-
2012-title22-vol1-part228.pdf)

4. Scope of Work for Research

This section describes the expected scope to be considered and outlined in the
technical proposal for this RFA.

3
ILIMS aims to ensure integrated systems thinking and to elevate cross-cutting issues
across the portfolio. Applicants are required to demonstrate a systems approach to the
topic, intentionality to integrate cross-cutting issues, approach to measurable impact,
and potential to contribute to one or more of the ILIMS objectives. ILIMS recognizes that
numerous technologies have been developed in irrigated and mechanized agriculture,
as well as rainfed systems, but no single technology can address the complex, multiple
challenges in agri-food systems. Increasingly, there is a recognition that technology
development needs to consider specific geographic and socio-economic contexts and
then, adapt to or integrate measures to influence the institutions, policies, social
practices and economic systems. In other words, an innovation is a set of appropriate
pieces that combine to meet the needs and conditions of a specific situation. To be fit-
for-purpose, the design of interventions will also consider potential trade-offs over time;
some contemporary projects refer to this as socio-technical bundling. The ILIMS
research portfolio will reflect this approach to contribute to five inter-related objectives:
Objective 1: Context-suitable socio-economic, institutional, and technological
interventions that effectively target and reduce risks for multiple producer types.
Objective 2: Strengthened, inclusive natural resource governance and improved
climate adaptation, mitigation, and resilience capacities.
Objective 3: Strengthened and inclusive market and finance ecosystems for
irrigation and mechanized technology systems with reduced inequalities in access
to mechanization and irrigation technologies and services.
Objective 4: Strengthened stakeholder capacity throughout the market system to
manage trade-offs and sustain natural resources.
Objective 5: Improved health, equity, and nutrition security through protected
water and diets in mechanization and irrigation interventions.
The scope of this RFA covers the five categories listed below. Specific information for
each category is provided in the corresponding Annex, as indicated. Applicants will
be asked to indicate which category their proposal seeks to address; applicants may
choose but are not required to indicate multiple categories, as relevant to their
proposal. Institutions and organizations may submit multiple proposals and/or join
multiple consortia across categories and geographies.
RFA Categories:
1. Irrigation service provision (Annex 1)
2. Mechanization service provision (Annex 2)
3. Agricultural water management in the landscape (Annex 3)
4. Innovative finance and agricultural water management (Annex 4)
5. Capacity needs and approaches to strengthen (Annex 5)

4
5. Application Requirements
This section describes the requirements for a complete proposal to be considered under
this RFA.
Applications must be submitted through the on-line portal by 31 October 2024, 16:00
Central Daylight-Saving Time/UTC -5. The online portal in Piestar will guide you through
the process and will tell you what information to submit. Applicants should note the
information provided here is to enable applicants to prepare information to complete all
components in the application portal to qualify for funding. The components required
include the following:

Applicant and application information will be collected in

the Piestar portal. The required information pieces on the
Applicant Information Piestar form are listed in Section A below to enable
applicants to gather information before completing the
online form.
Technical proposal will be submitted as a PDF uploaded in
Technical Proposal the Piestar portal. Applicants must follow the format
outlined in Section B below.
Budget proposal will be in summary and will be uploaded
Budget Proposal as an unlocked Excel document in the Piestar portal.
The budget should use the provided template.

A. Applicant information
Organizational information of the applicant and the application will be entered in the
online portal as prompted. Applicants must ensure all fields are completed and accurate
before submitting. This list provides the information that applicants will need to provide
for the application form in Piestar.

Information required Notes

Lead organization(s) information Name, address, authorized organizational
representative, phone, email
Unique Entity Identifier number for Number provided by the US government’s
lead (and co-lead) System for Award Management
(www.sam.gov); required before award
negotiation.

5
 Lead Principal Investigator (for Name and contact information (address, email,
lead and co-lead organization) phone)
CV Required (maximum 4 pages) upload (PDF)
Partner organization information Name, address, authorized organizational
representative, phone, email
Co-PI at each partner organization Indicate name and contact information
(address, email, phone)
CV Required upload (PDF)
Name of project Short name for proposed research project (no
more than 8 words)
Duration of proposed project State in number of months (maximum 36)
(months)
Geographical area(s) Select countries
Total funding requested Total amount for Life of Project, in USD
RFA Category Select category most relevant to RFA;
applicants may indicate multiple categories
Institutional review board: Internal Applicants will be required to indicate if they will
available or external support manage their own institutional review for human
needed subject research or if they require external
support for approval. This information is
required even for research expected to be
exempt.
Executive summary of the 300 words
proposal

B. Technical proposal
Applicants must follow the provided outline below for funding consideration. The
technical proposal may be no more than 10 pages with a minimum of 12 size font. Any
pages or materials beyond the 10 pages will not be considered in the review process.
The technical proposal must include the information as indicated, organized in the
following sections:

Cover page: Lead applicant and partner organization name(s); lead principal
investigator name and contact; proposed project title; proposed country(ies)
Overview: Applicants should provide background or overview of the proposed
research topic and justification for relevance.

6
Geographical focus: Applicants should state the targeted geographical focus and
country or countries and describe/justify the selection.
Research objectives and hypothesis/question: Applicants are required to state
research aims and/or objectives, as well as the hypothesis(es) and/or questions.
Applicants are requested to indicate how the research aligns with ILIMS research
questions and how the project would contribute to achieving the ILIMS objectives.
Brief overview of methodology: Applicants are expected to describe the research
process and methods planned to implement the research effectively. Mixed methods
approaches that take a systems-level perspective are encouraged.
Project implementation approach: Applicants are expected to describe the intended
key activities, intermediate and final outputs, and related timeline. Preliminary
indicators for project delivery may be included.
Organizational capacity: Applicants are expected to describe the capacity of the
project lead organization and co-leads or implementers to manage the project
effectively, with reference to experience, on-going projects or partnerships, etc.
Project partnerships: Applicants are expected to describe direct and/or indirect
partnerships and organizational relationships that will enhance relevance and enable
the proposed project to influence policy and/or practice. This may include linkages to
other anticipated or on-going projects and initiatives. Note that a local partner in each
targeted country is required. Partners in consortia should note their plans to
coordinate across organizations, recognizing the need to intentionally enhance
inclusivity and equity, especially in groups with potential for uneven power dynamics.
Indicate leadership and decision-making roles and participation of local partner
organizations, institutions, and/or associations that may ensure project suitability to
local context and alignment with local needs and priorities.
Impact pathway: Applicants are required to describe an impact pathway that
demonstrates the applicant has considered the relationship between the research
process, project activities, outputs, and medium- to longer-term outcomes. Applicants
may include a brief description of the intended tools or frameworks or approaches that
will enable the project to work toward achieving impact. Applicants may include an
exit strategy related to sustainability after project completion/end of funding.
Linkages with existing policy, practice or stakeholder platforms or associations:
Numerous technical and multi-stakeholder platforms exist at various levels, from
community to national to regional and global. Likewise, many technical and practice-
oriented communities or similar organizations, groups and associations, related to the
project topics, are already on-going. Applicants are required to describe plans for
direct and/or indirect involvement in existing platforms and processes that will enable
the proposed project to influence policy and/or practice at one or multiple levels.
Applicants may describe their intention to leverage linkages with other projects or
initiatives.

7
 Cross cutting issues: Applicants are required to outline the approach to integrate or if
appropriate, focus on cross-cutting issues in the proposed project. Gender, age and
social dynamics are central to efforts to expand and sustain irrigation and
mechanization. Women and youth often make up a large part of the labor force and
contribute substantially to agricultural production. Women and men, across
generations, often have different needs and preferences for agricultural technologies,
services and related information. In addition, when services are made available in an
area, women, youth and other marginalized groups often do not benefit directly due to
many factors. Research that aims to contribute to expanding the use of mechanization
and irrigation services must understand and consider approaches to address the
needs, preferences, and constraints of marginalized groups (household, community or
market scale). At the intersection with these marginalized groups, the capacities,
capabilities and skills of individuals, institutions, and sectors also relate to
mechanization and irrigation scaling and sustainability. Applicants must outline
intentional plans to give attention to one or more cross-cutting issues.
Data management plan: All applicants must briefly outline the data management plan
for the proposed project: type of data to be collected, data storage method, and the
plan/timeline and open access repository for sharing data after research is completed.
If the applicant seeks to collect data that would not be made publicly available for
commercial reasons, then this must be described and justified. Applicants should
indicate if they may need support to access and utilize an open access data
repository.

C. Budget
Applicants are required to submit a summary budget for the proposed activity using
the [budget template]; other formats will not be considered. The budget must be in US
dollars; each application should not exceed $800,000 and not be less than $150,000.

COST ITEM
A. SALARY AND ALLOWANCES
B. FRINGE BENEFITS
C. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION
Domestic
International
D. EQUIPMENT/SUPPLIES >$5000
E. SUB-AWARD
F. CONTRACTUAL
G. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
I. INDIRECT COSTS
Total F&A, Overhead, etc.
J. TOTAL
K. COST SHARE CONTRIBUTION

8
Applicants are encouraged to include cost-share and/or leveraged funds in the budget
as an indication of the applicant’s commitment to the proposed activity.

Note that the budget for the full proposal application is a summary. Applicants who are
short-listed to move to a second review will be asked to provide a detailed budget with
sufficient information to determine the reasonableness, allowability, and allocability of
costs. It is important to note that applicants will not be allowed to change the total
budget request; no significant changes will be allowed across the budget amounts from
the summary budget.

Applicants should note the following when completing the proposal budget:

• Short-listed applicants will provide a detailed budget for the project duration.
Applicants should plan accordingly, as the total budget amount may not be
changed.
• Indirect or overhead rates can be included, but if moving to second review and
negotiation, the applicant must provide supporting financial records and meet
federal limitations and requirements as specified in 2 CFR 200.414.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-
E/subject-group-ECFRd93f2a98b1f6455/section-200.414
• The following are NOT eligible for funding and should not be included in the budget
proposal: a) goods from Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) restricted person
or country; b) equipment procurement for the purpose of wholesale import and
retail distribution; c) agricultural commodity procurement.

6. Evaluation: Process and criteria

This section describes the planned process and criteria for review and evaluation of
proposals.

An evaluation committee (composed of ILIMS management entity, University of

Nebraska staff/faculty, and external experts) will review and rate proposals in
accordance with the evaluation criteria described below. The project reserves the right
to prioritize which applicants receive funding or to not fund any of the applicants.

Criteria for evaluation Points

Innovation and technical merit 30
Implementation plan viability 20
Likelihood to contribute to development impact 20
Partnerships 20
Budget reasonableness 10

9
 A. Innovation and technical merit
Proposals will be evaluated based on strength of the content and potential for
contribution to new knowledge and new practices and approaches that hold likelihood to
strengthen policies, practices, technologies and approaches in target geographies.
Notably, proposals should contribute to a better understanding of and solutions for
climate adaptation, climate mitigation, and other livelihood strategies for smallholder
farmers and other agri-food system actors.

B. Implementation plan viability

Proposals will be evaluated on the feasibility to implement the project and complete the
proposed product(s) or service(s) on time. Reviews will consider if proposals have
sufficiently recognized key risks and mitigating measures that may be taken. These
risks may include but not be limited to: organizational structures/process, social context,
market system, institutional and/or political conditions, economic conditions, business
operating context, and maturity of partnerships.

C. Likelihood to contribute to development impact

Proposals will be evaluated based on relevance of the research to contribute to
equitable, sustainable scaling of and benefit from irrigation and mechanization services
in target geographies. Applicants should demonstrate an awareness of and response to
stated needs of USAID target groups (e.g., poor farmers, bottom of the pyramid market
segments, women, marginalized or minoritized groups, youth), and include an explicit
strategy or approach to enable benefit for women, youth and/or marginalized or
minoritized producers or other value chain actors within the system. Application
evaluation will consider the proposed learning activities and knowledge sharing
mechanisms to enhance outcomes from research for target geographies and groups. In
addition, applications are expected to complement and support the U.S Government
Global Food Security Strategy (GFSS).

D. Partnerships
Proposals will be evaluated based on the proposed partnerships and the value of the
partnerships for contributing to impacts (e.g., ILIMS objectives, SDGs, GFSS goals,
national or regional goals, and/or others high level aims). A priority is ensuring strong
participation and leadership of at least one local partner; applicants should demonstrate
an intentional approach to localization or inclusivity with priority given to activities that
integrate and/or elevate a local partner(s). An additional priority is participation of a

10
private partner (company, entrepreneur, producer group) that is registered and
operating in the targeted region or country and has a significant contribution to make to
potential project outputs and outcomes.

E. Budget reasonableness
Proposed budgets will be evaluated based on best value. Notably, the budget line
summary and the Cost Note will be measured as: 1) the application demonstrates that
resources will be applied in a way that will enable timely, effective achievement of
proposed outputs, 2) the application demonstrates cost realism as the most probable
cost of performance for the proposed technical and management approach.

7. Instructions for Submission

All components (applicant information, technical proposal and budget) must be
submitted in the online application portal: https://irrig-mech.piestar-rfx.com/rfps

Deadline for application submission is 31 October 2024 (Thursday) at 16:00 Eastern

Standard/UTC -5. Receipt of submitted application will be confirmed through an
automated email.

Applicants may submit questions to [email protected] until 6 September 2024.

Responses will be posted no later than 16 September 2024 at the Piestar RFX link.

Notification of short-listed applicants is expected on or before 25 November 2024. The

final review will be after short-listed applicants provide all requested information.

Negotiation for awards is expected to begin in December 2024. Project implementation

is expected to begin in March 2025, with exact timing to be determined based on the
completion of negotiation and full execution of award.

The following will not be considered for review:

• Proposals submitted by email, unless pre-arranged in cases of weak internet.

• Proposals submitted after the deadline.
• Proposals delivered in hard copy form.
• Documents that are locked, require passwords, etc.
• Zip files, other executable files, and files that are larger than 5 MB.

All[ submitted information and documents related to this request for applications shall
be in English and all costs shall be expressed in US dollars.

11
Prior to award, due diligence may be undertaken on selected applicants, which includes
reference checks; a pre-award survey to ensure successful applicants have the
organizational, managerial, and financial systems and controls in place to manage the
award; and if necessary, site visit(s) to evaluate the proposed strategy. Applicants also
may be asked for verification of rates and costs proposed.

University of Nebraska reserves the right to fund any or none of the applications
submitted. Issuance of this solicitation does not constitute an award or commitment, nor
does it commit the University of Nebraska to pay for costs incurred in the preparation
and submission of an application.

12
Annex 1: Irrigation Service Provision
ILIMS takes a systems approach to account for the complexities of suitable irrigated
farming. The demand for irrigation systems and services is expected to continue to
increase with rising demand for food, weather variability and increasing rural labor
costs, scarcity and burdens. Farmers are utilizing a broad range of irrigation options,
such as irrigation services, pump rentals, equipment leases, pay-to-own, direct
ownership, and various combinations. Demand varies across different farmer groups
and farming systems. Suitable combinations of socio-economic and technological inputs
(i.e., ‘socio-technical bundles’ or composites of options) are needed that effectively
reach and benefit poor smallholder farmers, women farmers, youth, and other
marginalized groups.
ILIMS aims to better understand existing and emerging approaches to expand irrigation
access through irrigation service provision. We seek to identify the potential suitability
and sustainability of irrigation service provision, particularly provided by private sector
entities through the market system, in various contexts and for different farmer clients.
Irrigation service provision has not been sufficiently studied in Feed the Future target
countries. Knowledge gaps remain around existing irrigation services, such as farmer
demand, level of irrigation service supply, cost-benefits at farm level, household
benefits, among other issues. ILIMS therefore intends to support research on irrigation
service provision suitability and scalability that can complement the available research
evidence.
In addition to the knowledge gaps on demand and at the farm or household scale, we
also recognize a lack of information about the supply of irrigation services. Farmers,
entrepreneurs and companies are investing in and expanding their operations to meet
the demand for an increasingly wide range of irrigation products and services.
Successful, profitable, and inclusive scaling through market systems for irrigation
services requires a large range of institutions and partnerships. ILIMS intends to support
research that provides insight into the range of business models for irrigation service
provision, to understand what business models are most suitable in what biophysical
and socio-economic conditions, what constraints irrigation service providers face to
expand, and what types of investment or finance are needed.
A better understanding is needed of both the demand and supply side constraints – and
opportunities or interventions that can reduce constraints. Public interventions, private
investments, marketing strategies, specialized business models, client acquisition
approaches for poor farmers, finance instruments for farmers and service suppliers, can
all be strengthened to be fit-for-purpose.
Currently, irrigation investments are increasing in the Global South, but these are
largely led by and benefiting individuals and companies that are already better off,

13
especially higher income, advantaged groups. Many agricultural input supply companies
that are expanding in ‘frontier’ markets in Feed the Future countries omit women from
strategies as they target high income farmers. Therefore, investments and approaches
are needed to ensure access for poorer farmers and women farmers without increasing
the risks to their livelihoods or resilience, especially amid climate change and in fragile
ecosystems. While it may be assumed that irrigation services are more accessible to
women farmers than irrigation equipment purchase, there may be factors – whether
intra-household, community or other socio-economic issues – that restrict women from
such services. Research is needed to identify the factors that lead to exclusion of poorer
women and youth from access to the benefits of irrigated agriculture and to begin to
identify approaches that can mitigate further marginalization.
The issues outlined here are not exhaustive; knowledge gaps remain in understanding
suitable, sustainable approaches to expand access to irrigation for smallholder farmers.
We provide below indicative research questions, but also recognize that information
priorities and knowledge gaps are often highly contextual.
• Under what contextual conditions can irrigation service provision best contribute to
agricultural productivity, profitability, and/or improved livelihoods?
• What social, economic, market, production, or other conditions hinder equitable
access to and/or benefit from irrigation services in target geographies and for target
groups and people? What social and technological innovations, such as bundles or
composites of interventions, can accelerate access for poor and marginalized
farmers without increasing their risks?
• What irrigation service business model(s) are profitable and hold potential for
sustained operation? What irrigation service business model or combination of
irrigation service providers and other types of businesses are best suited to reach
particular areas or groups? What constraints do service providers face and what
types of approaches can reduce constraints to improve market viability?
• What market system approaches or interventions, such as types of business
models, finance instruments, partnership models, institutions or policies, among
others, can strengthen the viability of irrigation service provision?
• What are the roles of various actors in the market ecosystem (including public
agencies, private sector, finance, community or farmer-based organizations,
research) and what types of support or interventions might strengthen roles for
market-based supply of irrigation services? What conditions might be most suitable
for market-based, public-sector based, or combined initiatives to expand irrigation
service provision?

14
Annex 2: Mechanization service provision
Numerous initiatives have been implemented over the past few decades to increase
mechanized agricultural production in low- and medium-income countries. Various
approaches have been used through both the public and private sector to consolidate
services, provide services and equipment on credit, and generally strengthen the supply
of various machines for production, harvest, and post-harvest. Despite the anticipated
benefit of mechanization to increase production and lower costs, the numerous
constraints in the farm mechanization system limit smallholder farmers from access to
equipment and tools. The mixed results of investments in agricultural machinery and
mechanization highlight significant knowledge gaps, which warrant further study.
ILIMS aims to support research to understand the varying conditions and outcomes
related to mechanization investments; our focus is on-farm production and harvest or
threshing at the farmgate. Existing evidence suggests mixed results in terms of
productivity, farm profitability, and farmer livelihoods, while others point to projects that
may worsen household or farm debt levels. Several projects and research in South
Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America show that smallholders are best able to
afford mechanization through machine hiring or mechanization service providers, rather
than investing directly in equipment. While some farmers may eventually invest in their
own equipment, many continue to utilize either public or private service providers. Some
promote aggregation of services and inputs to enable farmers to access multiple
agricultural inputs from single sources, such as mechanized services, agrichemicals,
agronomic advice, and credit. However, in some contexts, mechanization service costs
can account for a large part of total production costs for smallholder farmers and
increased farm costs for mechanization do not necessarily increase the area under
production. This suggests knowledge gaps on smallholder access to mechanized
production, as well as on smallholder benefits and risks related to mechanization.
Historically, many initiatives and programs sought to only push technology, particularly
imported machinery that has lacked a developed distribution and post-sales service
network. Smallholders, entrepreneurs and equipment suppliers and servicers may all
benefit in a functioning mechanization service and agricultural equipment market.
Factors such as policies, financial regulations and energy costs may keep equipment
prices above the reach of entrepreneurs who could offer mechanized farm services. The
lack of capacity in the market system also shortens the equipment lifecycle, which in
turn causes faster depreciation and need for replacement. At the same time, it is
unclear that efforts to reduce barriers to market entry, such as tariff removal, equipment
subsidies, and smallholder credit for agricultural equipment have contributed to
medium- to long-term market growth and resilience. Moreover, the viability of various
public and private business models for service provision, particularly under different

15
conditions, is not well understood. These knowledge gaps point to the need for more in-
depth, targeted research on mechanization and particularly, mechanization service
provision business and investment models within the market system.
Generally, recent research, albeit limited, points to significant knowledge gaps in
suitable pathways to sustainable adoption of mechanization, such as context-specific
economic conditions, agro-climatic conditions, and critical social factors. Some
initiatives have sought to provide employment and entrepreneurship openings for
women and youth through mechanization services, but research has shown that
stakeholders in Sub-Saharan Africa do not necessarily agree with assumptions about
youth, mechanization and digitalization. At the same time, very little research has been
done to understand the gendered nuances of operating a business for mechanized
services. Equally concerning, very little is known about the contextual factors that hinder
or enable women to access and to benefit from on-farm and production-related
mechanized services.
ILIMS seeks to support research that can generate more evidence to design technical,
social, economic, and institutional approaches; and direct investments that are viable
within the intersecting social, market, and agri-food systems. Notably, we do not intend
to fund research on development of new equipment or artificially push machinery that is
not suitable to context. The knowledge gaps suggested here are indicative and not
exhaustive, particularly when considering context-specific conditions. We provide some
overarching research questions but recognize other questions may be relevant in a
particular country context.
• Under what conditions can mechanization service provision best contribute to
agricultural productivity, profitability, and/or improved livelihoods in the target
geographies?
• What social, economic, market, production, etc. conditions hinder equitable access
to and/or benefit from irrigation and mechanization services in the target
geographies?
• What socio-technical innovation bundles can accelerate access to mechanization for
poor and marginalized farmers without increasing their risks (e.g. increased
household or individual debt, natural resource degradation, or other risks)?
• What market system approaches, including types of business models, client
acquisition approaches, finance and credit, can strengthen the inclusivity of
mechanization systems for poor, youth, women?
• What are the roles of various actors in the market ecosystem (including public
agencies, private sector, finance, community or farmer organizations, research)?
• Are youth and women interested in playing roles in mechanization and irrigation
market systems? If so, how do we catalyze their involvement?

16
Annex 3: Agricultural water management
in the landscape
Across much of the Global South, smallholder farmers operate in systems that are
transitioning from fully rainfed to supplement and full irrigation as farmers adapt to
climate changes and aim to meet increased demand for agricultural produce/ Expanded
access to water for irrigation in the Global South is essential for economic growth, food
and nutritional security, and climate resilience. Yet increased water use can lead to
water scarcity and water quality degradation and undermine progress. Incremental
improvements in approaches and techniques can have disproportionately large
consequences and benefits.

Agricultural water management (AWM) includes consideration of multiple users and

uses of water in the landscape, including environmental flows. Other users of water in a
catchment might include industries, domestic users, other agricultural initiatives, or
power generation. On-farm incomes and livelihoods are undermined if environmental
goods and services are harmed. On the other hand, successful AWM that supports the
sustainable intensification of farmland and higher productivity per unit of water
consumed can enhance catchment functioning. AWM is also fundamentally influenced
by the changing climate, but also a cornerstone of climate resilient and sustainable
agriculture.

Improving AWM will occur at the system level; many interlinked facets influence each
other in sometimes complex and non-linear ways. The management of both water
quantity and water quality are equally important and closely linked. AWM takes place at
a variety of scales, from the farm field to the catchment and beyond, and includes
rainfall, surface water, soil water, and groundwater. AWM also applies across multiple
timescales, from a single rainfall event to episodic recharge of some aquifers which may
only take place once a decade or longer. Scaling improved approaches will consider all
stakeholders, institutions, and environmental characteristics. Durable and workable
local solutions to the challenges of AWM, with benefits that accrue to most or all
stakeholders, will be sensitive to local context as well align with catchment and wider
considerations. Improved AWM must take the local physical and institutional conditions
into account, since all users and catchments have unique characteristics. AWM also
takes place in the context of existing socio-economic, financial, environmental, and
institutional conditions, and it must be compatible with these, in keeping with the
principles of integrated water resource management.

Historically marginalized groups, particularly women and youth, have often been
neglected in AWM initiatives and their experience and expertise neglected. Given the

17
significant roles of women in water and agriculture, gender relations are therefore
fundamental to understanding the suitability and feasibility of improved AWM.

As AWM changes and becomes more intentional and planned, practices should
increasingly be quantifiable and measurable. This will enable greater access to data
and analysis that can be used to continue to improve practices. Indicators might include
biophysical and economic metrics as well as social, gender, equity, and institutional
characteristics.
Although AWM is fundamentally a local problem in which sustainable solutions are local
solutions, common research questions emerge. There is a need for improved
technologies and socio-economic packages, conceptual frameworks, management
systems, and financial products, as well as better targeting and tailoring. The key issues
outlined here are indicative, particularly when considering context-specific conditions.
We provide some overarching research questions but recognize other questions may be
relevant in a particular country context.

• What solutions for AWM that retain water and nutrients, and build soil health, are
most promising, what obstacles prevent wider roll-out, and what practical actions
can be taken to support scaling in both rainfed and irrigated areas?
• Where irrigation is feasible, what irrigation solutions meet local needs and integrate
with local institutions while staying within environmental limitations?
• What bundles of techniques and approaches are most practical for understanding,
preserving, and improving catchment water quality, and avoiding siltation,
agrochemical over-use, salinization, microbiological contamination, etc.?
• What mechanization systems or technologies appear to be most useful in promoting
or enhancing AWM? How can these be embedded in value chains or business
models?
• Within the local institutional context, what are the current AWM practices favored by
small farmers, how effective are these, and what is preventing wider adoption and
roll-out?
• How do local and national policy and institutional settings enhance or diminish AWM
at the farm and catchment scale? What trade-offs, compromises, and conflicts
appear to exist? Are there policy level changes that could enhance significant
improvements in on-farm or catchment level AWM?
• How can AWM be better quantified? How can the “gap” between available spatial
data in bandwidth-heavy or complex formats, and the needs of local farmers, be
bridged?

18
Annex 4: Innovative finance related to
agricultural water management, irrigation
and/or mechanization
Finance is central to increasing investments in irrigation and mechanization. However,
the credit available is nearly always insufficient and credit products not suitable to
smallholder farmers. In addition to supply, recent evidence suggests a nuanced and
complex set of constraints from both supply and demand sides. For example, not all
farmers want credit for irrigation or agricultural equipment, even if they can access
loans. Farmers, whether individual smallholders, groups or cooperatives, are diverse;
farmers have varying levels of risk aversion and different – often very specific - types of
credit needs.

Recent innovations in climate finance are enabling equipment supply companies to

access various types of climate finance. While fixing supply from financial institutions
and equipment supply companies will not necessarily address all the issues, some of
these methods offer potential for reducing the costs of equipment and thereby some of
the demand side constraints. However, these options in the credit carbon market are
relatively new. It is unclear if the tools are more effective than other approaches in
benefiting smallholder farmers, such as tariff reforms, various types of insurance, or
equipment subsidies, or various other instruments.

Moreover, women farmers face additional challenges to accessing suitable credit,

compared with men. Women are often at a disadvantage in access to information,
sufficient assets, or a documented financial history in their name. Women may be
perceived to credit providers as risky and not credit-worthy when standard criteria are
used. Even with an increase in the number of village savings and loans associations,
women still cannot access the amounts of credit that would be needed to invest in
equipment. Furthermore, women are often even more risk averse than men in the
agriculture sector, which affects credit demand.

Another emerging climate finance option is more targeted toward rainfed farmers and
considers water and land management at the landscape or watershed scale. Whether
termed green water credits or payment for environmental services, climate funds and
carbon credit schemes are beginning to pay attention to compensating smallholder
farmers for good practices that sustain healthy environments, for example, reducing
run-off and erosion to the benefit of downstream users. Again, as relatively new
innovations, particularly related to climate funds and carbon credits, the suitability,
sustainability, and equitability are not well-documented or analyzed.

19
The knowledge gaps suggested here are indicative and not exhaustive, particularly
when considering specific, contextual conditions. We recognize other gaps or questions
may be relevant in a particular country context.

• What financial tools and strategies are needed to provide capital and risk
management innovations to enable expansion of access to irrigation, mechanization
and improved agricultural water management, including in rainfed systems, more
broadly?
• How inclusive are financial mechanisms? Can financial instruments be targeted and
be adapted to be more inclusive of women and marginalized groups?
• How robust are the underlying methodologies? How can methods be improved to
support a robust and equitable deployment of climate and other finance
instruments?

20
Annex 5: Capacity needs and capacity
strengthening approaches
There is broad consensus that strengthened local capacity at all levels of irrigation and
mechanization systems is essential for local leadership and sustainability. Recent
engagements have highlighted major capacity gaps as systems transition from rainfed
to irrigated, from manual labor to mechanization, all amid unpredictable weather
patterns due to climate change. In addition, there are gaps in context-specific innovation
bundling and scaling, equipment repair and maintenance training for personnel,
capacity for natural resource governance, and capacity for cross-sectoral innovation.
However, short-term training investments have not had the expected impact and
capacity remains low. ILIMS aims to support research that will contribute to more
effective human resource capacity development for stronger mechanization and
irrigation systems.

Currently, capacity pinch points are blocking the scaling of irrigation and mechanization
equipment and practices, particularly for market-based scaling. Private companies
struggle to find a skilled workforce for sales and distribution, service provision, and
repair and maintenance. The challenge of ‘spares and repairs’ increases risks and costs
for companies, public agencies, and farmers. Irrigation equipment suppliers are
searching for local staff who can conduct water assessments and support good water
stewardship. Irrigation and mechanized service provision by inexperienced and
untrained operators are causing high breakdown rates and short equipment lifecycles.
Scaling technologies requires farmer and farm-level capacity and information access,
creating a strong market system for irrigation and mechanization requires capacity in
fabrication, manufacturing, maintenance and repair services, and irrigation and
mechanized service provision. Moreover, training in business and finance is not
adequately preparing youth for career opportunities that form a critical foundation for
agricultural-based economic growth. ILIMS seeks to strengthen capacity in the business
ecosystem for scaling different modalities, e.g., capacities ranging from specialized
irrigation and agricultural equipment finance, business model development, information
technology, and technical skills for specific equipment.

At the same time, there is a call for capabilities to prepare for climate change impacts
and extreme weather. While public sector agencies (e.g., water bureaus and National
Agriculture Research and Extension Services (NARES)) recognize the growing
importance of planning based on suitability, as well as monitoring water quality and
availability, they often lack the institutional and individual capabilities to set guidelines,
collect data, conduct monitoring, or educate the public and industry on regulations. For
example, irrigation equipment suppliers provide digital sensors and collect large data
sets on water, but NARES and dysfunctional hydromet networks lack the capacity to
use the data. ILIMS will consider supporting efforts to engage with public institutions to
build local capacity that can coordinate efforts on natural and water resource
management across scales, including with communities and particularly with industry.
ILIMS recognizes that such efforts will require research to gain a better understanding

21
of both the capacity gaps and needs, as well as the types of partnerships that are
needed; short-term training will not be sufficient.

Historically, the research, public, and private sectors have operated separately, often at
cross-purposes in the Global South. Tertiary education institutions largely remain
disconnected from private industry. Curricula are not oriented to training a suitable,
current workforce for industry or governance as agriculture intensifies and climate
change impacts compound. While skills are still needed in infrastructure design, much
of the irrigation industry requires new skills that align with new directions and
approaches to irrigation investment and expansion. The lack of innovation and
innovative partnerships in the sector cascades down to Technical, Vocational, and
Educational Training (TVET). In some cases, private companies and service suppliers
are bypassing formal education institutions to set up their own schools and programs. In
other cases, companies are working with TVET and universities to set up targeted
training and certification programs tailored to their needs.
Undeniably, the human resource pipeline is out of step with contemporary needs.
Despite significant public and development partner funding for short-term training,
capacity gaps persist, exacerbated by a stifled innovation system. Strengthening
linkages between sectors and fostering collective innovation are fundamental to
overcoming capacity gaps and scaling irrigation and mechanization. These knowledge
gaps – in terms of understanding the capacity needs and the best approaches to
address those gaps - are indicative and not exhaustive, particularly when considering
specific, continual conditions. We offer some overarching research questions but
recognize that other questions may be relevant in a particular country context. While the
primary focus of the call is not to fund more short-term training, such requests will be
considered if they are innovative, and the need has been clearly outlined. The main
purpose of this call is to identify the gaps with greater specificity and to identify the best
approaches to address current and future capacity needs.
• What capacities are needed by the private sector to expand distribution and ensure
continued services to more farmers, including women and those at the bottom of the
pyramid?
• What capacity and capabilities are needed in the short- to medium-term to contribute
to resilient market systems in mechanized and irrigated agriculture? What are the
most effective approaches to ensure continued availability of skills and capabilities?
• What capacity strengthening approaches and methods can support sustainable
human resource development to ensure readiness and resilience for climate change,
extreme weather events, and unexpected crises in food systems?
• Which modalities for capacity strengthening are most suitable to enhance the roles
and capabilities of relevant public institutions and private sector actors engaged in
scaling irrigation and mechanized equipment and services?

22