This is a chapter of the book Innovation platforms for agricultural development edited by Iddo Dror, Jean-Joseph Cadilhon, Marc Schut, Michael Misiko and Shreya Maheshwari.
Capacity development (CapDev) is increasingly acknowledged as a crucial part of agricultural development. In the CGIAR Strategic Results Framework (SRF), CapDev is included as a ‘cross-cutting issue’ and as a strategic enabler of Research for Development (R4D) impact for CGIAR and its partners. It goes far beyond the transfer of knowledge and skills through training, and cuts across multiple levels.
The international workshop on Agricultural Innovation Systems in Africa (AISA) was held in Nairobi, Kenya, on 29–31 May 2013. Its main objectives were to learn jointly about agricultural innovation processes and systems in Africa, identify policy implications and develop policy messages, and explore perspectives for collaborative action research on smallholder agricultural innovation.The workshop focused on sharing experiences in trying to understand and strengthen multi-stakeholder innovation processes and the role of smallholders in innovation, and identifying and discussing priorities an
Agricultural innovation systems are complex, multi-layered, and can be difficult to define and analyse. In this paper, we provide examples of ‘systems analysis’: describing the context, what was done, and how the outcomes informed broader research and development activities. The five cases describe analyses of: i) agricultural systems in North-West Vietnam; ii) household food security in Central Vietnam; iii) agricultural innovation systems in Central Africa; iv) wheat commodity systems in Sub-Saharan Africa, and v) the national agricultural research system in Papua New Guinea.
Innovation platforms are fast becoming part of the mantra of agricultural research and development projects and programs with an innovation objective.
Innovation Platforms (IPs) have become a popular vehicle in agricultural research for development (AR4D). The IP promise is that integrating scientific and local knowledge results in innovations that can have impact at scale. Many studies have uncovered how IPs work in various countries, value chains and themes. The conclusion is clear: IPs generate enthusiasm and can bring together stakeholders to effectively address specific problems and achieve ‘local’ impact.
Although much has been written on how to implement and facilitate innovation platforms efficiently, few studies support ex-ante appraisal of when and for what purpose innovation platforms provide an appropriate mechanism for achieving development outcomes, and what kinds of human and financial resource investments and enabling environments are required. Without these insights, innovation platforms run the risk of being promoted as a panacea for all problems in the agricultural sector.
Innovation platforms are by nature democratic spaces for joint problem identification, analysis, prioritization, and the collective design and implementation of activities to overcome problems. They are part of agricultural systems, and only a very small number of the stakeholders will be represented in the innovation platforms. This article sustainability and sucess criterea ofinnovation platforms
Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems (RAAIS) is a peer-reviewed research for development tool that has been developed, tested and used in 18 countries across 3 continents.
RAAIS supports the identification and analysis of complex agricultural problems in agrifood systems. The joint assessment of problems and identification of innovations to overcome these problems with farmers, policymakers, private sector and other stakeholders provides a starting point for collective action towards achieving development outcomes and impact.
The objective of this paper is to explore the extent to which systems approaches to innovation are reflected in the crop protection literature and how such approaches are used. A systematic literature review is conducted to study the relation between crop protection and systems approaches to innovation in 107 publications. The analysis of the crop protection literature demonstrates that only a small fraction is systems-oriented as compared to the bulk of publications with a technology-oriented approach.