This document represents a collaborative effort by the Secretariat of the Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR) and the Regional Forums to agree on a common policy for advocacy on Information and Communication Management. The recognition of knowledge as a critical resource for practising efficient farming and developing agriculture makes sharing and exchange of knowledge globally vital for agricultural development.
Conference proceedings of a 3-day workshop on Communicating Carbon, organized and hosted by the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture, and Food Security (CCAFS), which brought together field practitioners from carbon projects to exchange lessons learned and to develop improved skills related to communication about carbon projects.The workshop has highlighted best communication practices used to inform farmers about carbon markets, contracts, and risks involved in engaging with carbon projects.
This sourcebook outlines some of the key tools used by those involved in institutional development. While there are an increasing number of tools and techniques,the focus here is on those that are used or have been used in DFID’s own institutional work.
This working paper offers an overview of current theory and practice on climate change communication and social learning in the global South with a view of informing CCAFS strategy in this area. It presents a theoretical framework for understanding social learning and communication approaches and reviews the current landscape of approaches, tools and decision aids in communicating climate change in the context of development.
This publication represents a synthesis of assessments of national agricultural innovation systems in countries of Central Asia, South Caucasus and Turkey. The first chapter gives an introduction of the project “Capacity Development for Analysis and Strengthening of Agricultural Innovation Systems in Central Asia and Turkey”, out of which the current publication reports about one of the project outputs achieved.
This book documents a unique series of 19 case studies where agricultural biotechnologies were used to serve the needs of smallholders in developing countries. They cover different regions, production systems, species and underlying socio-economic conditions in the crop (seven case studies), livestock (seven) and aquaculture/fisheries (five) sectors. Most of the case studies involve a single crop, livestock or fish species and a single biotechnology.
The study report is based on case studies from Bangladesh (Sulaiman, 2010), Bolivia (Pafumi and Ulloa, 2010), DR Congo (Mbaye, 2010) and Ghana (Adjei-Nsiah and Dormon, 2010) which were carried out with the purpose of assessing needs and gaps with regard to the provision of innovation support services for climate change adaptation. It took the form of desk-studies complemented with key informant interviews.
Research, extension, and advisory services are some of the most knowledge-intensive elements of agricultural innovation systems. They are also among the heaviest users of information communication technologies (ICTs). This module introduces ICT developments in the wider innovation and knowledge systems as well as explores drivers of ICT use in research and extension
This paper (Part II) presents work to develop a network diagnosis tool for stakeholders involved in agricultural supply chains in Bolivia. It is complemented by a further paper (Part I) by Boru Douthwaite and colleagues in the same issue of this journal which presents a case study of work conducted by the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). The prototype methods used in both Parts I and II are based on social network analysis (SNA) methodology.
In innovation studies, communication received explicit attention in the context of studies on the adoption and diffusion of innovation that dominated the field in the 1940‐1970 period. Since then, our theoretical understanding of both innovation and communication has changed markedly. However, a systematic rethinking of the role of communication in innovation processes is largely lacking. This article reconceptualises the role of everyday communication and communicative intervention in innovation processes, and discusses practical implications.