The 2016 Global Agricultural Productivity Report advocates policies and innovations in five key areas to help the agriculture and food sectors manage uncertain seasons of fluctuating business cycles and climate change, while fostering competitiveness today and sustainable growth tomorrow.
This study introduces a framework for managing information flow in innovation systems. An organisation's capacity to receive information, to share it with others and to learn from it is assumed to be the key factor that shapes the flow patterns and, hence, the performance of the innovation system concerned. The framework is applied to characterise the information structure underlying the agricultural innovation system of Azerbaijan and to develop an information strategy for the system to accelerate the information flow.
The Guide to Effective Collaborative Action is built on the foundation of 10 years' experience in transforming food and agricultural commodity systems by UNDP's Green Commodities Programme. It is broadening the application from support to commodity production to the transformation of food systems. The four building blocks of putting systems change into practice, integrated with backbone support and essential practices for stakeholder actions, provide a framework for Changing Systems through Collaborative Action.
This publication describes the activities carried out in the tripartite event ‘Transforming Nutrition-Sensitive Value Chain Development in the Pacific Islands.” It was implemented by the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) in collaboration with MORDI Tonga Trust, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the Pacific Islands Private Sector Organisation (PIPSO). The document starts discussing the main events and field trips that were realized after talk about the lessons learned and in the end brings some case studies and sucess stories.
Growing local and informal markets in Asia and Africa provide both challenges and opportunities for small holders. In developing countries, market failures often lead to suboptimal performance of the value chains and limited and inequitable participation of the poor. In recent years, innovation platforms have been promoted as mechanisms to stimulate and support multistakeholder collaboration in the context of research for development. They are recognized as having the potential to link value chain actors, and enhance communication and collaboration to overcome market failures.
Several posters have been created on the occasion of the 5th TAP Partners Assembly (Laos, 20-22 September 2017) to show recent activities and achievements in the eight pilot countries of the CDAIS project.
Mobile phones fit well into the lives of pastoralists in low-income countries. The technology is firmly integrated into most pastoralist communities, affecting and transforming several core activities. Most studies concerned with this relationship, however, have narrow regional and thematic foci. The complementarity or discrepancy between relevant research is unknown, and a critical assessment of the current state of research is lacking.
Dans le besoin urgent de lutter contre le changement climatique, une priorité essentielle est de renforcer la capacité de ces groupes et communautés les plus vulnérables, et déjà fortement affectés, à améliorer leur capacité à adapter leurs systèmes de subsistance.
Qu’en est-il des « activités non agricoles » ? Peuvent-elles être pensées au-delà d’une perspective de survie ? De la transformation des récoltes à la commercialisation d’artisanat culturel, en passant par le transport routier, la location de téléphone portable ou le conseil en technologies de l’information, les activités non agricoles occupent un éventail très large. Leur utilité est de plus en plus reconnue.
Competing models of innovation informing agricultural extension, such as transfer of technology, participatory extension and technology development, and innovation systems have been proposed over the last decades. These approaches are often presented as antagonistic or even mutually exclusive. This article shows how practitioners in a rural innovation system draw on different aspects of all three models, while creating a distinct local practice and discourse. We revisit and deepen the critique of Vietnam’s “model” approach to upland rural development, voiced a decade ago in this journal.