The Agricultural Innovation System (AIS) is a network of organizations, enterprises and individuals that focuses on bringing new products, processes and forms of organization into economic use, together with the institutions and policies that affect their behaviour and performance. In the small North East Indian state of Tripura, System of Rice Intensification (SRI) has grown to develop into an innovation system where various stakeholders have come together to make the state self-sufficient in food grains.

This paper identifies the stakeholders of System of Rice Intensification (SRI), their roles and actions and the supporting and enabling environment of innovation in the state as the elements of the Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS) in SRI in Tripura state of India and studies the relationship matrix among the stakeholders. Methodology: A descriptive research design was followed to study the agricultural innovation system in SRI.

This paper draws lessons from selected country experiences of adaptation and innovation in pursuit of food security goals.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the use of food insecurity as coercive tool or a weapon during conflict, providing a case study on Gaza. The authors aim at proving that Food insecurity in Gaza is not merely a product of conflict, but rather a systematic policy of control. The paper includes the presentation of community-based innovations that were created in the extremely intricate case of Gaza, in order to retain certain economic and political agency over food and farming systems. 

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.

This paper, using Thailand as a case study, aims at understanding the national innovation system (NIS) in developing countries which are less successful in technological catching-up. In contrast to developed countries, the development level of Thailand’s NIS does not link to its economic structural development level. As Thailand moves from agricultural to an increasingly industrial economy, its NIS remains weak and fragmented. The mismatch between the two affected Thailand’s competitiveness and partially contributed to the recent economic crisis.

In order to determine the factors affecting the adoption of agricultural innovations, 169 farmers were reviewed in 7 counties that may represent Erzurum province in terms of social, economic and cultural aspects. The data were analyzed in LIMDEP software using logistic regression method and the results were presented in tables. The innovations examined in the study were adoption of artificial insemination, membership to cooperative, having automatic waterer in stables and making use of incentives for agricultural production.

LenCD has prepared a joint statement on results and capacity development (presented in this publication), which stresses that meaningful, sustainable results are premised on proper investments in capacity development and that these results materialize at different levels and at different times, along countries’ development trajectory. To provide evidence in support of this statement, LenCD launched a call for submission of stories.