This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion in the scientific literature on the advantages and disadvantages of privatization of extension and advisory services and the shift from thinking in terms of the traditional Agricultural Knowledge System towards a broader Agricultural Innovation System.

In the systems perspective on innovation, co-operation between several different types of actors is seen as key to successful innovation. Due to the existence of several gaps that hinder such effective co-operation, the scientific and policy literature persistently points at the need for intermediary organizations to fulfill bridging and brokerage roles. This paper aims to provide an overview of the insights from the literature on such ‘innovation brokers’, and to contribute to the literature by distilling lines of enquiry and providing insights on one of the lines identified.

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.

This presentation argues the need of green growth in agriculture, analyzes features of the innovation systems and ends with some policies practices. The presentation has been prepared for "Innovation and Modernising the Rural Economy", OECD’s 8th Rural Development Policy Conference, 3-5 October 2012 (Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation).

Given the search for new solutions to better prepare cities for the future, in recent years, urban agriculture (UA) has gained in relevance. Within the context of UA, innovative organizational and technical approaches are generated and tested. They can be understood as novelties that begin a potential innovation process. This empirical study is based on 17 qualitative interviews in the U.S. (NYC; Philadelphia, PA, USA; Chicago, IL, USA).

In this paper the authors present the development of an analytical framework to study agricultural innovation systems. They divide the agricultural sector into four levels and expand the innovation system approach to study innovation processes.

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.

his paper draws on the transition literature to examine niche-regime interaction. Specifically it aims to reveal and contribute to an understanding of the processes that link sustainable agriculture innovation networks to the agricultural regime. It analyses findings from participatory workshops with actors in 17 Learning and Innovation Networks for Sustainable Agriculture (LINSA) across Europe. Framing linkage as an adaptive process, whereby regime actors and entities adapt to incorporate LINSA, and vice versa, reveals different patterns and processes of adaptation.

Historically, farmers have been some of the most innovative people in the world. However, agriculture lags behind other sectors in its uptake of new information technologies for the control and automation of farming systems. In spite of decades of research into innovation, generally we still do not have a good understanding as to why this is the case. This paper reviews two theories of innovation and offers a new approach to thinking about agricultural ICT (e-Agriculture). It firstly explores the problem of ICT adoption in agriculture.

The study examines whether the goal of food security for the population of Sverdlovskaya oblast, one of the mostly industrial northern region in Russia, aiming agricultural productivity improvement and rural poverty reduction, could be achieved by the regional authorities within post-soviet type of agricultural policy. Results show that, the current trends of agricultural production and rural social development in Sverdlovskaya oblast are degrading.