This brochure presents the Programme on Bridging the Rural Digital Divide, that begun in 2003 under the implementation of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The programme highlighted innovative approaches to knowledge exchange that were taking advantage of new (at that time) digital technologies, and that were based on synergies between information management and communication for development. At the time this was referred to as "information and communication for development"(ICD).
Cette brochure présente un programme stratégique intitulé «Combler le fossé numérique en milieu rural», mis en œuvre en 2003 pour l’Organisation des Nations Unies pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture (FAO). Le programme exposait des approches novatrices pour le partage des connaissances qui tiraient partie des nouvelles technologies numériques (de l’époque) et qui s’appuyaient sur des synergies entre la gestion de l’information et la communication pour le développement. A l'époque cela était appelé «information et communication pour le développement" (ICD).
Este folleto presenta el Programa estratégico para “Reducir la Brecha Digital en el Medio Rural”, implementado en 2003 por la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO). El programa destacó enfoques novedosos para el intercambio de información, que aprovechaban de nuevas (en ese tiempo) tecnologías digitales, y se basaban en sinergias entre la gestión de información y la comunicación para el desarrollo. En ese momento este proceso se llamaba "Información y Comunicación para el Desarrollo" (ICD).
Early applications of the innovation systems framework to developing-country agriculture suggest opportunities for more intensive and extensive analysis. There is ample scope for empirical studies to make greater use of the theoretical content available in the literature, and to employ more diverse methodologies, both qualitative and quantitative. Further, there is room to improve the relevance of empirical studies to the analysis of public policies that support science, technology, and innovation, as well as to policies that promote poverty reduction and economic growth.
The role of civil society in influencing public opinion towards more democratic and developmental approaches is now well-recognised in diverse fields such as health, education, livelihoods, issues relating to disadvantaged social groups and the environment. Yet, science and technology in India is predominantly seen as the preserve of the state, and more recently the market. In the linear model of innovation, civil society is seen at best as having a role in extension or the delivery of technology produced elsewhere.
The flyer points up an overview of: (i) new approaches to capacity building and institutional change; (ii) ICRA’s role in the South; (iii) ICRA’s role in the North and in linking South and North.
Farmers and businesses need to adapt constantly if they are to survive and compete in the rapidly evolving environment associated with the contemporary agricultural sector. Rethinking agricultural research as part of a dynamic system of innovation could help to design ways of creating and sustaining conditions that will support the process of adaptation and innovation. This approach involves developing the working styles and practices of individuals and organizations and the incentives, support structures and policy environments that encourage innovation.
The Community Based Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation (CB-PME) tool empowers poor local farming communities to improve their livelihoods. While this process is people centred, it draws on local people’s capacities, while giving the end users of a technology a voice. The experience of the Katamata farmers’ group in Tororo district using PM&E (the participatory approach to monitoring and evaluation) is given in this paper.
This research project aims to build ACP capacity to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of the local science, technology and innovation system in the agricultural sector.
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.