ILRI Consultancy (Request for Proposal): Evidence and Gap Maps and Systematic Reviews on Climate Change and Agri-Food Systems

LCE/ 2157/2026

The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) seeks to recruit to engage the services of an individual consultant, or a group of researchers affiliated with an institution to conduct rigorous evidence and gap map, and systematic review of scientific knowledge on various aspects of climate change and agri-food systems. A total of three (3) evidence syntheses will be commissioned as a part of CGIAR’s Climate Action Science Program. Given the CGIAR's and ILRI's mandates, the scope of this evidence synthesis will be limited to countries in the Global South, specifically those in Africa, Asia, and South America.

ILRI works to improve food security and nutrition and reduce poverty in developing countries through research for efficient, safe, and sustainable use of livestock. It is the only one of 11 CGIAR research centers dedicated entirely to animal agriculture research for the developing world. Co-hosted by Kenya and Ethiopia, ILRI has regional or country offices and projects in East, South and Southeast Asia as well as Central, East, Southern and West Africa. www.ilri.org

The agricultural sector is increasingly facing challenges due to climate change, which manifests droughts, floods, temperature fluctuations, and other extreme weather events. These challenges necessitate a deeper understanding of adaptation and mitigation strategies to enhance the resilience of agri-food systems. To improve our understanding of how climate change affects agri-food systems and how well current and future solutions work, the CGIAR Climate Action Science Program's Area of Work will conduct a series of evidence synthesis led by ILRI.

As a part of this work, ILRI will fund up to a maximum of three (3) evidence and gap map, and systematic reviews, on the topics listed below. The outputs of the evidence synthesis will provide valuable insights and recommendations for policy and practice, helping to shape the CGIAR and its partners' research agenda in the future.

The consultant will be expected to carry out the following tasks:

• Topic 1: Effectiveness of current or future adaptation measures to droughts, floods, pests, and diseases and value chain interruptions [roads, shipping, etc.] in the context of agriculture and agri-food systems, with a particular focus on:-

• Effectiveness (including cost-effectiveness) of genetic and agronomic innovations (e.g., drought- or flood-resilient seeds and production systems) coupled with various on-farm management practices in reducing climate-related risks for smallholder producers.
• Effectiveness, including cost effectiveness of different water related adaptation interventions
• Effectiveness of migration (in all its forms) and off-farm livelihoods in reducing climate-related risks for smallholder farmers.
• Effectiveness of socio-technical adaptation bundles and locally led adaptation (LLA) principles to identify effective adaptation options.

• Topic 2: Effectiveness of mitigation and low emissions pathways in the agri-food sector in reducing emissions without compromising food security, with a particular focus on:

• 2.1 Effectiveness (including cost-effectiveness) of various emissions reduction strategies across agri-food production systems in LMIC context. Examples include sequestration across farm, field and landscapes
• 2.2 Effectiveness (including cost-effectiveness) of reducing energy-induced emissions across agri-food systems, e.g. use of renewable energy in various parts of the agri-food systems value chain, or bio-mass based measures e.g. (e.g. bioenergy, BECCS, biochar etc.).
• 2.3 Effectiveness (including cost-effectiveness) of reducing fertilizer-induced emission across agri-food systems; e.g. via use of balance fertilizer application, green ammonia and other technological advances
• 2.4 Effectiveness (including cost-effectiveness) of reducing enteric methane and manure related emissions from livestock sector, including interventions that promote improved animal health, genetic innovations; feed/grazing management, manure management.
• 2.5 Effectiveness (including cost-effectiveness) of various mitigation measures across demand -side of the food systems, including but not limited to: shift to sustainable healthy diets; reduce food loss and waste; reduce food-mileage related emissions

• Topic 3: Innovations in climate finance and national R&D systems for understanding how resource-poor women and men food system actors in the Global South can access finance and innovations, with a focus on:

• 3.1 Effectiveness of existing climate finance mechanisms and/or interlinkages among various finance institutions for effective agrifood system transitions in economies in the Global South
• 3.2 Readiness and effectiveness of national agricultural research centres and other national-level agricultural research and development organisations in the Global South on research related to climate change impacts, adaptation and mitigation in the agri-food sector.

This call is a part of CGIAR's Climate Action Science Program's Area of Work 1 and is being led by ILRI. However, the topics for evidence synthesis are not limited to ILRI's mandate on livestock alone but should cover the topics mentioned above.

We welcome applications across varying scopes and geographies, provided the geographies are from the Global South/Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs).

Scope of the work

Proposal for Evidence and Gap Maps and Systematic Reviews using standard methodologies and protocols used in health and environmental impact assessments on any of the topics outlined above.

Methodology Evidence synthesis should employ a systematic approach, such as an evidence and gap map (also sometimes called a scoping review) and systematic review, including:

• A protocol that has a clear definition of the scope of the review, the method (includes cumulative reviews such as scoping review, systematic map, and descriptive review or aggregative reviews such as systematic reviews, meta-analyses, realist and umbrella reviews (also known as overviews of reviews)), with explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Comprehensive literature search and screening.
• Define what sub-sectors are focused on in each systematic review.
• Synthesis of findings to identify gaps, trends, and key insights.

Final Products

The entire commission is expected to be completed within nine months from the date of signing the contract. Key milestones and deliverables include:

• Month 1: Inception Report (deliverable 1)
• Month 2: First draft of protocol for Evidence and Gap Map (also sometimes called scoping review) (deliverable 2)
• Month 3: Final protocol for a scoping review and a systematic map published on either CGSpace (CGIAR's document repository) or any other publicly available specialized repository (deliverable 3)
• Month 4: First draft of the Evidence and Gap Map (also called Scoping Review) (deliverable 4)
• Month 5: Final draft of the Evidence and Gap Maps (also called scoping review) either on CGSpace or any other public repository or submitted to a journal for publication (deliverable 5)
• Month 6: First draft of protocol for systematic review/meta-analysis protocol (deliverable 6)
• Month 7: Final protocol for systematic review/meta-analysis published on CGSpace (CGIAR's document repository) or any other publicly available specialized repository (deliverable 7)
• Month 8: First draft of systematic review/meta-analysis (deliverable 8)
• Month 9: Final draft of systematic review/meta-analysis ready for submission to a journal (deliverable 9) and a PowerPoint presentation (deliverable 10). The PowerPoint presentation must summarize all outputs (protocols, systematic maps, systematic review) and key findings and takeaways for a lay audience.

Consultancy Fee: Lumpsum payment of USD 30,000 per review is to be paid in 4 equal installments in the following sequence:

• 25% during the signing of the contract (in Month 1)

• 25% after delivery of deliverables 1 to 3 listed above (in Month 3)

• 25% after delivery of deliverables 4 to 7 listed above (in Month 7)

• 25% after delivery of deliverables 8 to 10 listed above (in Month 9)

Post location: Home based.

Expected places of travel: N/A

Duration: 9 months based on agreed milestones and deliverables

Contract dates: 9 months from the start of contract date

Essential skills and qualifications

The selected lead Consultants and their teams should possess:

• A Master's or PhD in fields related to climate change, with experience in carrying out rigorous evidence synthesis, including systematic reviews and meta-analysis.
• Minimum of 5 years of research/academic experience and particularly proven expertise in conducting meta-reviews in related fields of study
• Proven experience of working with interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary teams is an advantage
• A track record of publishing systematic review papers in peer-reviewed journals is essential.

How to apply:

The applications should not exceed 8 pages (excluding the title page and list of references, and an annex containing CVs of team members and names of referees). Your proposal must follow the specified structure and adhere to the word limits. Any proposal that does not adhere to these instructions will not be considered.

Title page (1 page, will not count towards word limits):

1. Title of the proposed review: Title should be self-explanatory
2. Identify the topic number to which this call responds ( Ideally, your review should address only one topic.
3. Include the names and affiliations of the team members, as well as their respective roles in this proposed review. We encourage applications from diverse teams in terms of discipline, gender, and nationalities. If the topic is related to Indigenous Knowledge, there must be an Indigenous Knowledge holder in the review team.
4. In annex 1, please provide a 2-page CV of each of the team members.

Summary (2 pages – 1000 words maximum) -- Given the large volume of applications that we receive, a small screening team from among the proposal evaluators will read the 2-page summary document to decide whether the proposal will go to the full team of proposal evaluators for further consideration. Therefore, please ensure that this 2-page document includes a comprehensive summary of your proposal.

The summary of the proposal should have the following sections:

• Problem definition, justification for the proposed review and objectives of the review
• Research questions that can be answered effectively through systematic reviews using a PICO/PECO framework.
• A brief description of the methodology, which should include standard steps such:
  • Strategy for scoping of evidence and a search strategy including key search terms and search strings.
  • A tentative idea about the volume of the literature, along with databases that will be searched (peer reviewed, published and/or grey literature)
  • Eligibility criteria for inclusion and exclusion of literature that helps answer the research question within the PICO/PECO framework
  • Plans for data coding and extraction – mention any software that will be used
  • Plans for critical appraisal and synthesis, including if any critical appraisal tool, that will be used, including how you will assess internal and external validity, and criteria for assessing risk of bias
  • Plans for synthesis, whether mapping, narrative, quantitative, qualitative (or mixed)
• Your main stakeholder groups – those who may have an interest in the research questions or are likely to use the evidence for their work.
• Plans for use of evidence and its dissemination

Section 1 (1 page, 500 words) Background and justification

Provide background and justification on why the chosen topic (which must fall within the list of broad topics identified in this call) is important from a policy perspective, what is the current status of knowledge on this topic, including if there is existing evidence synthesis on this topic, and how your evidence synthesis will fill in a knowledge gap that’s worth filling.

Section 2 (½ page, 250 words): Objectives and research questions

Explain the objectives and formulate the research questions that the review will address. Formulate the research question using PICO/PECO framework used in environmental evidence synthesis.

Section 3 (3.5 pages, 1750 words) Review method

Please follow the standard methodologies for systematic reviews and structure this section, making sure you have covered all the needed steps, such as protocol design, search strategy, search terms and strings, sources of information, likely volume of the literature you expect, inclusion and exclusion criteria, plans for data extraction and coding, critical appraisal of internal and external validity and risk of bias, and synthesis methods, and expected outputs.

Section 4 (½ page, 250 words) Involvement of stakeholder groups

Describe your stakeholder group. Stakeholder groups would include anyone (individuals or organizations) who have an interest and influence in the way you design your review questions or anyone who may be interested in using the evidence you generate for their work. Please describe how you will incorporate feedback from these identified stakeholder groups during the design stage, as well as during the dissemination stage.

Section 5 (½ page, 250 words): Publication and dissemination strategy

List possible journals where you will want to publish your review, and a brief plan for dissemination of your results.

References (limit to 10-15 references only, this will not count towards your word limit)

Annex (this will not count towards word limits, but keep it brief)

• Evidence of previous work on systematic reviews, which should not exceed 1 page. Here is a list of all publications related to systematic reviews by the PI and team members.
• Bios of PI and team members, which should not exceed two pages per person.
• Activity and deliverable plan in a Gantt chart (assume projects are commissioned by Aug-Sept 2025, and continue for 9 months).
• The names and addresses (including telephone and email) of three referees who are knowledgeable about the candidate's (or the team's) professional qualifications and work experience, particularly in context of their expertise in systematic review.

Please add a proposal format compliance checklist at the front of your consolidated PDF proposal and tick all applicable boxes. This will help us ascertain the completeness of your proposal. Incomplete proposals will not be considered.

☐ Cover letter included

☐ Proposal title (add here):
☐ Topic addressed (Tick only one option):

☐1.1 ☐1.2 ☐1.3 ☐1.4 ☐2.1 ☐2.2 ☐2.3 ☐2.4 ☐2.5 ☐3.1☐ 3.2
☐ Lead institution / affiliation of lead PI (add here):

☐ Names of all team members included
☐ Affiliations for all team members included
☐ Roles for all team members included
☐ Team composition notes representation (disciplinary / gender / Global South) included

Main proposal content

☐ Summary included (which is 2 pages or less, 1000 words or less)

☐ Section 1 included (which is 1 page or less, 500 words or less)

☐ Section 2 included (which is ½ pages or less, 250 words or less)

☐ Section 3 included (which is 3½ pages or less, 1750 words or less)

☐ Section 4 included (which is ½ pages or less, 250 words or less)

☐ Section 5 included (which is ½ pages or less, 250 words or less)
☐ References section included (not more than 15 references)

Annex section included and attached, containing the following:
☐ Evidence of previous evidence-mapping/scoping work included (≤ 1 page)
☐ CVs attached (≤ 2 pages per team member, with their roles)
☐ Gantt chart included for 9-month plan
☐ Names and contact details of three referees included

☐ All documents submitted as single PDF (including cover letter, main proposal not exceeding 8 pages, annex with all documents).

Applicants should send a proposal not exceeding 8 pages, plus annexes as outlined above (including CVs of all team members), and a cover letter. Applicants should additionally include the names and addresses (including telephone and email) of three referees who are knowledgeable about the candidate’s professional qualifications and work experience to the Head of people and culture by clicking on the "Apply Now" tab above before 13th April. The position title and reference number LCE/ 2157/2026 should be clearly marked on the subject line of the cover letter.

We thank all applicants for their interest in working for ILRI. Due to the volume of applications, only shortlisted candidates will be contacted.

ILRI does not charge a fee at any stage of the recruitment process (application, interview meeting, processing, or training). ILRI also does not concern itself with information on applicants' bank accounts.

To find out more about ILRI, visit our websites at http://www.ilri.org/

ILRI is an equal opportunity employer