Motivated by donor interest in innovative thinking on food security, the authors conducted an interdisciplinary, triangulation analysis of four divergent conceptual frameworks, each relevant to diagnosing food insecurity in developing countries. They found notable tensions as well as synergistic interactions between agroecology, agricultural innovation systems, social–ecological systems, and political ecology. Cross-framework interactions enhance our understanding of how sectoral and macro-economic development strategies impact on livelihoods, availability, and access.
This paper describes the research path followed by a team of researchers who had investigated the nitrate problem in a case study area, and who became aware of the low impact of their data on the policy debate and on the practices that – as the research team saw it – had given rise to the problem in the first place. They embarked on a series of interactions first with participatory action researchers from the SLIM project (see Fig.
Innovation platforms (IPs) are a way of organizing multistakeholder interactions, marshalling ideas, people and resources to address challenges and opportunities embedded in complex settings. The approach has its roots in theories of complexity, the concept of innovation systems and practices of participatory action research. IPs have been widely adopted across Africa and beyond in recent years as a “must have” tool in a range of “for development” modes of agricultural research.
Se analizan los efectos de las interacciones, directas e indirectas, entre agricultores y otros actores relevantes en el intercambio de información y conocimiento para la innovación agrícola. Los datos se obtuvieron al preguntar a 120 agricultores «¿de quién aprende y/o a quién recurre para obtener información o conocimiento de cuestiones técnicas y productivas en torno a su unidad de producción?». Se emplean indicadores del análisis de redes sociales para proponer lineamientos que permitan catalizar la innovación agrícola.
Innovation platforms are fast becoming part of the mantra of agricultural research and development projects and programs with an innovation objective.
Scientific research continues to play a significant role in meeting the multiple innovation challenges in agriculture. If this role is to be fulfilled, provision needs to be made for effective translation of research outputs, where translation is understood to be the process whereby science becomes part of useful knowledge for decision making. There is increasing interest in enhancing translation in the European agricultural innovation, research and policy context, and specifically in making it a more collaborative process.
This paper presents and discusses a diagnostic framework to identify institutional processes in the creation of public-private partnerships (PPPs) for agricultural innovation. The diagnostic framework proposed here combines a conceptualisation of institutions with a conceptualisation of technology. We argue that a performative notion of institutions provides a better tool for institutional diagnostics than the common understanding of institutions as ‘rules of the game’.
This paper addresses the question how public-private partnerships (PPPs) function as systemic innovation policy instruments within agricultural innovation systems. Public-private partnerships are a popular government tool to promote innovations. However, the wide ranging nature of PPPs make it difficult to assess their effects beyond the direct impacts they generate for the partners.
Although agricultural innovation systems (AIS) have recently received considerable attention in academic and development circles, links between an AIS's regional specifications and structural-functional analysis have been neglected. This paper aims to understand how regional and structural dimensions determine systemic problems and blocking mechanisms that, in turn, hinder a regional AIS's function.
This paper evaluated the implementation of an initiative for promoting risk-based approaches to improve food safety management in Vietnam. A Taskforce of Risk Assessment for Food Safety (Taskforce) was formed and consisted of researchers working on risk assessment and food safety, and representatives of the related ministries of Health and of Agriculture. We used the OECD Development Assistance Committee Evaluation Criteria as a framework for assessing the impact of the Taskforce with five evaluation areas – relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability.