In times of market liberalization and structural adjustment, the agricultural sectors of developing countries face profound changes. To seize new market opportunities, farmers need to innovate. In order to innovate, farmers need new technologies and information on how to access and manage them, as well as better support services for the delivery of inputs and knowledge, and better infrastructure for delivering produce to the market.
La présente note commence par indiquer brièvement en quoi une politique de la concurrence est importante pour les économies en développement et en transition. Elle aborde ensuite certains éléments essentiels de l’établissement d’une culture de la concurrence. Idéalement, ce processus devrait tout d’abord consister en une « évaluation des besoins » dans différents domaines, qui permettra probablement de dresser une liste de mesures à hiérarchiser et à prendre.
The increasing complexity of technology development and adoption is rapidly changing the effectiveness of scientific and technological policies. Complex technologies are developed and disseminated by networks of agents. The impact of these networks depends on the assets they command, their learning routines, the socio-economic environment in which they operate and their history.
This paper argues that impact assessment research has not made more of a difference because the measurement of the economic impact has poor diagnostic power. In particular it fails to provide research managers with critical institutional lessons concerning ways of improving research and innovation as a process. Paper's contention is that the linear input-output assumptions of economic assessment need to be complemented by an analytical framework that recognizes systems of reflexive, learning interactions and their location in, and relationship with, their institutional context.
In the post-harvest area and in agriculture research in general, both in India and internationally, policy attention is returning to the question of how innovation can be encouraged and promoted and thus how impact on the poor can be achieved. This publication assembles several cases from the post-harvest sector. These provide examples of successful innovation that emerged in quite different ways. Its purpose is to illustrate and analyze the diversity and often highly context-specific nature of the processes that lead to and promote innovation.
This paper reviews a recent donor-funded project concerning the introduction of post-harvest technology to poor hill farmers in India. Rather than conform to conventional development aid projects of either a “research” or an “interventionist” nature, it combines both approaches in a research-action program, which has more in common with a business development approach than a formal social science one. An important conclusion is that the work (and apparent success) of the project is consistent with an understanding of development that emphasizes the importance of innovation systems.
This document will try to outline the main specific characteristics of the thematic area of Post Harvest and Rural innovation. Also, following the Regional Priority Setting Exercise1, and the analysis of various initiatives (see annex 1), it will try to underline which commonalties and research priorities have been identified within the broad concept of this thematic area.
This presentation from the 2nd Triennial GFAR Conference, held in Senegal in 2003, presents InterSard and InterDev: two cases of partnerships for sharing information and knowledge on good practices and local innovation.
Since 1991, there have been significant changes in utilization of feed resources in the Ethiopian highlands: while use of communal grazing lands and private pastures has declined, use of crop residues and purchased feed has increased. In addition, although use of animal health services and adoption of improved livestock breeds and modern management practices have increased, ownership of various types of livestock has declined.
Empirical studies on agricultural technology adoption generally divide a population into adopters and nonadopters, and analyse the reasons for adoption or nonadoption at a point in time. In reality, technology adoption is not a one-off static decision, rather it involves a dynamic process in which information gathering, learning and experience play pivotal roles, particularly in the early stage of adoption. A conceptual framework for an adoption pathway is suggested in which farmers move from learning to adoption, to continuous or discontinuous use over time.