KIT and the Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA) published this joint publication in which farmers were put in the driver’s seat. Within the programme ‘farmer empowerment for innovation in smallholder agriculture’ (FEISA) farmers were provided tools and skills to enhance collaboration with private enterprises, as well as service providers, in multi stakeholder ‘innovation triangles’ within value chains for the benefit of smallholder farmers.
International partnership to carry out collaborative research and development programs has been implemented for a long time. However, with globalization, the economic, social, political and cultural diversity of interacting partners reached levels where this variety of collaborators often has shown some weaknesses in issues like governance. Strong and sound partnerships must be manageable in order to ensure the achievement of the set objectives.
The aim of this paper is to show the importance of monitoring genetic improvement programmes using the examples of an improvement programme for the Sahiwal breed in Kenya and a progeny testing scheme for Friesian cattle in Kenya. The paper is based on reports by Rege et al. (1992) and Rege and Wakhungu (1992) for the Sahiwal project and Rege (1991a and 1991b) for the progeny testing scheme for Friesian cattle.
This paper develops a quantitative, graph-theoretic method for analysing systems of institutions. With an application to the agricultural innovation system of Azerbaijan, the method is illustrated in detail. An assessment of existing institutional linkages in the system suggests that efforts should be placed on the development of intermediary institutions to facilitate quick and effective flow of knowledge between the public and the private components of the system.
In times of market liberalization and structural adjustment, the agricultural sectors of developing countries face profound changes. To seize new market opportunities, farmers need to innovate. In order to innovate, farmers need new technologies and information on how to access and manage them, as well as better support services for the delivery of inputs and knowledge, and better infrastructure for delivering produce to the market.
Uganda pioneered the use of budget support operations known as Poverty Reduction Support Credits (PRSCs) in the World Bank. PRSCs were designed to channel programmatic lending to support policy and institutional reforms in support of a country's Poverty Reduction Strategy, usually presented in the form of a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). In the case of Uganda the PRSCs were designed as a series of annual credits supporting a three year rolling program of reforms, based on Uganda's version of a PRSC, which is known as the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) .
Farmers in Asia like to grow cassava because the crop will tolerate long dry periods and poor soils, and will produce reasonable yields with little inputs. Most farmers realize, however, that cassava production on slopes can cause severe erosion, while production without fertilizer inputs may lead to a decline in soil productivity. Research has shown that cassava yields can be maintained for many years with adequate application of fertilizers, and that there are various ways to reduce erosion.
This study describes the evolving context and organisational linkages in the agricultural innovation system of Azerbaijan and suggests ways to promote effective organisational ties for the development, distribution and use of new or improved information and knowledge related to agriculture. Graph-theoretic principles and concepts are employed to assess the existing organisational linkages vital for agricultural innovations.
The purpose of this paper is to map some elements that can contribute to an IFAD strategy to stimulate and support pro-poor innovations. It is an initial or exploratory document that hopefully will add to an ongoing and necessary debate, and is not intended as a final position paper. The document is organized as follows.
There are divergent views on what capacity development might mean in relation to agricultural biotechnology. The core of this debate is whether this should involve the development of human capital and research infrastructure, or whether it should encompass a wider range of activities which also include developing the capacity to use knowledge productively. This paper uses the innovation systems concept to shed light on this discussion, arguing that it is innovation capacity rather than science and technology capacity that has to be developed.