El propósito de este estudio fue evaluar el aporte de las Escuelas de Campo (ECAS) al fortalecimiento de capacidades de productores ganaderos, específicamente en sus capitales humanos, utilizando la integración del Marco de Medios de Vida Sostenibles (MVS) y el Marco de Capitales de la Comunidad (MCC). Se identificaron cambios en los capitales de los productores influenciados por las ECAS usando métodos mixtos como entrevistas semi- estructuradas, grupos de discusión focal, observación sistemática de fincas y hogares.
Actores locales y productores agropecuarios en Latinoamérica tienen acceso limitado a la información agroclimática y, cuando logran acceder a ella, tienen dificultades para traducirla en conocimiento procesable y accionable. Si bien los servicios climáticos son reconocidos por contribuir a cerrar la brecha entre la generación de información climática y su uso por parte de las partes interesadas, su provisión y uso en Latinoamérica aún representa un desafío crítico.
Local stakeholders and agricultural producers in Latin America have limited access to agroclimatic information and, when they do gain access to it, they have difficulty translating it into understandable and actionable knowledge. While climate services are recognized as contributing to bridging the gap between the generation of climate information and its use by stakeholders, their provision and use in Latin America still represents critical challenge.
The poor performance of agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa is known to be largely due to the lack of effective and client- responsive agricultural research and development that could generate appropriate technologies and innovations to stimulate the agricultural development process. As a contribution to address this challenge, the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA), with support from the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID), developed a project for Strengthening Capacity for Agricultural Research and Development in Africa (SCARDA).
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) partnered with the Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions (APAARI) in 2011 to conduct a series of policy dialogues on the prioritization of demand-driven agricultural research for development in South Asia. Dialogues were conducted with a wide range of stakeholders in Bangladesh, India, and Nepal in mid-2012 and this report captures feedback from those dialogues.
This paper explores the application of the innovation systems framework to the design and construction of national agricultural innovation indicators. Optimally, these indicators could be used to gauge and benchmark national performance in developing more responsive, dynamic, and innovative agricultural sectors in developing countries.
The paper aims to identify barriers to the development of Learning and Innovation Networks for sustainable agriculture (LINSA). In such networks, social learning processes take place, and knowledge about sustainable agriculture is co-produced by connecting between the different frames and social worlds of the stakeholders with the help of boundary objects. Studying such processes at the interface between different knowledge spheres of research, policy and practice requires a specific methodology.
This chapter documents the learning process within the framework of innovation of soil fertility management practices that emerged from the implementation of Participatory Extension Approach (PEA) as part of service delivery reorientation within the Limpopo Department of Agriculture in South Africa.The chapter gives a narrative description of what transpired during the interaction between researchers, extension officers and farmers, the processes involved, the lessons and the conclusion.
There is renewed attention on the importance of advisory services and extension in rural development processes. This paper, based on the publication ‘Mobilizing the potential of rural and agricultural extension', focuses on five opportunities to mobilise the potential of extension and advisory services. The five areas are: (1) focusing on best-fit approaches; (2) embracing pluralism; (3) using participatory approaches; (4) developing capacity; and (5) ensuring long-term institutional support.
This paper examines how the different institutional innovations arising from various permutations of linkages and interactions of ARD organizations (national, international advanced agricultural research centres and universities) influenced the different outcomes in addressing identified ARD problems.