What efforts need to be made to effectively mainstream gender in agrifood value chain projects and programmes? When can a value chain intervention be considered ‘gender-sensitive’? What actions can be implemented to address gender inequalities along the chain?

Agricultural innovation systems has become a popular approach to understand and facilitate agricultural in-novation. However, there is often no explicit reflection on the role of agricultural innovation systems in food systems transformation and how they relate to transformative concepts and visions (e.g. agroecology, digital agriculture, Agriculture 4.0, AgTech and FoodTech, vertical agriculture, protein transitions). To support such reflection we elaborate on the importance of a mission-oriented perspective on agricultural innovation systems.

The latest comprehensive research agenda in the Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension was published in 2012 (Faure, Desjeux, and Gasselin 2012), and since then there have been quite some developments in terms of biophysical, ecological, climatological, social, political and economic trends that impact farming and the transformation of agriculture and food systems at large as well as new potentially disruptive technologies.

This year’s International Women’s Day (IWD) falls at a time where women across the globe are being disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The fisheries and aquaculture sectors have been particularly affected by the crisis. Although the data are limited, a significant amount of the workforce in these sectors is comprised of women. Most women carry out non-vessel based activities, including gleaning, processing and marketing, but the number of women in leadership positions is low.

This book chapter reviews the literature on agricultural innovation, with the threefold goal of (1) sketching the evolution of systemic approaches to agricultural innovation and unravelling the different interpretations; (2) assessing key factors for innovation system performance and demonstrating the use of system thinking in the facilitation of processes of agricultural innovation by means of innovation brokers and reflexive process monitoring; and (3) formulating an agenda for future research.

This thematic note discusses the role of innovation brokers in bridging communication gaps between various actors of innovation systems. On the basis of recent experience in the Netherlands, it outlines the success of brokers in finding solutions adapted to the needs of farmers and industry, and thus their positive impact on innovation adoption. This section also examines some issues on how brokers function, particularly with regard to balancing interests, funding their activities, and the role of government.

The process of knowledge brokering in the agricultural sector, where it is generally called agricultural extension, has been studied since the 1950s. While agricultural extension initially employed research push models, it gradually moved towards research pull and collaborative research models. The current agricultural innovation systems perspective goes beyond seeing research as the main input to change and innovation, and recognises that innovation emerges from the complex interactions among multiple actors and is about fostering combined technical, social and institutional change.

The privatization of agricultural research and extension establishments worldwide has led to the development of a market for services designed to support agricultural innovation. However, due to market and systemic failures, both supply side and demand side parties in this market have experienced constraints in effecting transactions and establishing the necessary relationships to engage in demand-driven innovation processes.

Agrifood value chains of small and medium-sized producers in the Near East and North Africa region have the potential to generate more value through improved access to high-value markets. Limited logistics capacity in the region, coupled with lack of access to continuous cold chain, has resulted in weak supply chain management, high level of food loss, lack of compliance with food quality and safety standards; information asymmetries; and unfair value distribution, affecting income and livelihood of small and medium-sized producers.