This book is about the challenges and practical realities of building the capacity to innovate. It describes the experiences of the Research Into Use (RIU) programme, a five-year, multi-country investment by DFID that aimed to extract development impact from past investments in agricultural research. Specifically, it explores different approaches through which innovation capacities were built.
Recent discourse in the field of participatory agricultural research has focused on how to blend vari- ous forms and intensities of stakeholder participation with quality agricultural science, moving beyond the simple ‘‘farmer-first’’ ideology of the 1980s and early 1990s.
This report elaborates on how to use the agricultural knowledge and innovation systems framework to promote innovation at different levels with special focus on European issues related to the implementation of Horizon 2020. It is of value as a conceptual and methodological reference regarding the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS).
Given the diversity and context-specificity of innovation systems approaches, in March 2007 the World Bank organized a workshop in which about 80 experts (representing donor agencies, development and related agencies, academia, and the World Bank) took stock of recent experiences with innovation systems in agriculture and reconsidered strategies for their future development. This paper summarizes the workshop findings and uses them to develop and discuss key issues in applying the innovation systems concept. The workshop’s recommendations, including next steps for the wider
Seed is the starting point of plant life, and hence the most fundamental input of agriculture. A seed system that assures the availability of the desired quality of seed to the producer at the right time is indispensable for his farming enterprise. In the case of the potato crop, the seed most commonly used is strictly speaking no seed, but a tuber. The constraints and opportunities in seed potato systems in East Africa are of a combined social, economic and technical nature.
Innovation is an important challenge for European agriculture, but little is known about the performance of the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS). This report contributes towards this knowledge, as it reports on experiences from different countries and regions. The systems are very different between countries, regions and sectors.
Multi-stakeholder partnerships network which is typified by the FARA-led Integrated Agriculture Research for Development (IAR4D) of the SSA-Challenge Program is an innovation platform (IP) composed of stakeholders bound together by their individual interests in a shared commodity or outcome. The result from such innovation platforms is largely influenced by the strength of the network. In this paper, similarities within and across platforms are assessed using the simple matching procedure. Results indicate consistency in conduct of Innovation Platform activities.
These proceedings include all the papers presented during the AISA workshop either as oral papers or as posters. It also includes the edited text resulting from the Living Keynote process, an innovation in itself.
The AISA workshop was held on 29-31 May 2013 in Nairobi, Kenya, as part of an international week devoted to Agricultural innovation in Africa. The AISA workshop focused on active social learning among participants, developed a collective "living keynote" about the following issues:
This background note for the development of an AIS Investment Sourcebook provides a menu of tools and guidance to invest in agricultural innovation in different contexts. The content is drawn on tested good practice examples and innovative approaches with emphasis on lessons learned, benefits and impacts, implementation issues, and replicability
The aim of this report is to provide a detailed review of documented social learning processes for climate changeand natural resource managementas described in peer-reviewed literature. Particular focus is on identifying (1) lessons and principles, (2) tools and approaches, (3) evaluation of social learning, as well as (4) concrete examples of impacts that social learning has contributed to.