The Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions (APAARI) in collaboration with the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), Department of Agriculture (DOA), Thailand, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations – Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (FAO RAP), Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR) and International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), organized a High Level Policy Dialogue (HLPD) on Investment in Agricultural Research for Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific on 8-9 December 2015 in Bangkok, Th
This publication comprises 24 full papers/abstracts presented at the “High Level Policy Dialogue on Investment in Agricultural Research for Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific” (Bangkok, 8-9 December 2015).
Le rapport est construit en trois parties : • la première partie traite de l’adaptation des agricultures familiales aux changements climatiques et des conditions de l’adaptation ; • la seconde partie aborde la place de l’adaptation des agricultures familiales dans les politiques publiques ; • la troisième partie propose un certain nombre de recommandations en vue d’une meilleure intégration de cette question dans les politiques publiques. Une présentation des trois études de cas-pays est par ailleurs proposée en annexe.
El informe está estructurado en tres partes:
• la primera parte trata de la adaptación de la agricultura familiar a los cambios climáticos y de las condiciones de la adaptación; • la segunda parte aborda el lugar que ocupa la adaptación de la agricultura familiar en las políticas públicas;
• la tercera parte propone algunas recomendaciones para una mejor integración de este tema en las políticas públicas.
Una presentación de los tres estudios de caso-países figura también en anexo.
The core idea of the article is the existence of complicated array of deterrent factors that influences innovation activity of agriculture organizations, and subjective, psychological factors among those factors as well. The main goal of this work is to assess the top management and proprietors’ of AIC enterprises readiness to implement the innovations. As a research’ working hypothesis used the decisive role of human factor in answering the question whether to innovate or not.
The contributions and dynamic interaction of thousands of stakeholders from all sectors have created the GCARD (Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development) Roadmap, providing a clear path forward for all involved. The Roadmap highlights the urgent changes required in Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D) systems globally, to address worldwide goals of reducing hunger and poverty, creating opportunity for income growth while ensuring environmental sustainability and particularly meeting the needs of resource-poor farmers and consumer.
This study presents a quasi-experimental analysis of the impact of FairTrade certification on the commercial performance of coffee farmers in Tanzania. In doing so the study emphasises the importance of a well-contextualised theory of change as a basis for evaluation design. It also stresses the value of qualitative methods to control for selection bias. Based on a longitudinal (pseudo-panel) dataset comprising both certified and conventional farmers, it shows that FairTrade certification introduced a disincentive to farmers’ commercialisation.
This Module is the third in a series of four that address capacity development competencies in FAO. It is intended to enhance FAO’s practices in designing, developing, delivering and evaluating its activities in support of learning in Member Countries, while ensuring that learning leads to sustainable capacity development.
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.
This paper discusses a range of approaches and benchmarks that can guide future design of value chain impact evaluations. Twenty studies were reviewed to understand the status and direction of value chain impact evaluations. A majority of the studies focus on evaluating the impact of only a few interventions, at several levels within the value chains. Few impact evaluations are based on well-constructed, well-conceived comparison groups. Most of them rely on use of propensity score matching to construct counterfactual groups and estimate treatment effects.