The added value of the co-production process delivering climate services in Niger

Climate services are recognized as an essential tool for sustainable development in strategic and climate-sensitive sectors. In developing countries, particularly in Africa, the literature offers successful examples of application, especially in the agricultural sector, which is dramatically sensitive to climate variability and change. While, initially, particular emphasis was placed on the outcomes of these services and the benefits they provide to users, several authors have recently focused their attention on the process. A climate service is understood as a cyclical process in which various actors interact, exchange knowledge, and establish relationships and mutual trust. This co-production process primarily serves to bridge the gap between science and society, making it particularly suitable for developing countries. While several authors claim that the  co-production process improves the service usability, the intrinsic value of the process is rarely recognized. This study aims to describe the process and document its added value using the example of Niger as a case study. In Niger two services addressing drought and floods have recently been developed, tested, and operationalized. This experience provides valuable lessons that can benefit researchers and practitioners in both developed and developing contexts. The value of the collaboration between different disciplines (transdisciplinarity) and roles (complementarity), along with the iterative and interactive learning process, emerge as key elements allowing a continuous improvement of the services and strengthening relationships among actors.

Based on the experience and perception of the stakeholders involved in Niger, we suggest considering the following four dimensions in evaluating the added value of the co-production process in climate services:

• Value added to the Climate Service co-production: the value created beyond more conventional approaches in service production, as well as the progressive technical enhancement resulting from the co-production process;
• Value added to the Climate Service functioning: on the service efficiency/effectiveness in terms of access to information, uptake of the services, action by users and Monitoring/Evaluation;
• Value added to the expansion of the service: on the service scaling-up, expansion and financial sustainability of the service beyond the initial funding period;
• Value added toward new services: capacity building among actors and stakeholders to envision and develop new services.

While the results of this process are qualitatively described in the paper, they could serve as guidance for researchers and practitioners in adopting such an approach. Additionally, they could represent a tangible example for funders and policymakers of the  added value of the process. Finally, the paper recommends the capitalization of pilot experiences through the national and global frameworks for climate services.