This synthesis report presents the outputs of the workshop organised by CTA at its headquarters in Wageningen, The Netherlands, 15-17 July 2008. The outputs are presented in two main parts, each corresponding to one of the workshop objectives, and ends with a section on the way forward as suggested by the workshop participants. It also includes a first attempt to come to a consolidated generic framework on AIS performance indicators, based on the outputs of the different working groups.
The purpose of this paper is to map some elements that can contribute to an IFAD strategy to stimulate and support pro-poor innovations. It is an initial or exploratory document that hopefully will add to an ongoing and necessary debate, and is not intended as a final position paper. The document is organized as follows.
There are divergent views on what capacity development might mean in relation to agricultural biotechnology. The core of this debate is whether this should involve the development of human capital and research infrastructure, or whether it should encompass a wider range of activities which also include developing the capacity to use knowledge productively. This paper uses the innovation systems concept to shed light on this discussion, arguing that it is innovation capacity rather than science and technology capacity that has to be developed.
LenCD has prepared a joint statement on results and capacity development (presented in this publication), which stresses that meaningful, sustainable results are premised on proper investments in capacity development and that these results materialize at different levels and at different times, along countries’ development trajectory. To provide evidence in support of this statement, LenCD launched a call for submission of stories.
PAEPARD supports/facilitates three aflatoxin-related research consortia: (a) Stemming aflatoxin pre- and post-harvest waste in the groundnut value chain in Malawi and Zambia; (b) Developing strategies to reduce fungal toxins contamination for improved food sufficiency, nutrition and incomes along the maize value chain in the arid and semi-arid lands of Eastern Kenya; and (c) Developing feed management protocols for dairy farmers in high rainfall areas in Kenya.
Grants for agricultural innovation are common but grant funds specifically targeted to smallholder farmers remain relatively rare. Nevertheless, they are receiving increasing recognition as a promising venue for agricultural innovation. They stimulate smallholders to experiment with improved practices, to become proactive and to engage with research and extension providers. The systematic review covered three modalities of disbursing these grants to smallholder farmers and their organisations: vouchers, competitive grants and farmer-led innovation support funds.
This paper synthesizes Component 2 of the Regoverning Markets Programme. It is based on 38 empirical case studies where small-scale farmers and businesses connected successfully to dynamic markets, doing business with agri-processors and supermarkets. The studies aimed to derive models, strategies and policy principles to guide public and private sector actors in promoting greater participation of small-scale producers in dynamic markets. This publication forms part of the Regoverning Markets project.
Partnership brokering is needed to work out new ways of organising food systems that treat agricultural smallholders as a resource and opportunity rather than a problem or distraction. This is because food systems are demanding innovation in the way they are organised. This is a matter of transforming stakeholders into partners in order to reconfigure food systems to operate differently, rather than just operate more efficiently. Fundamental systemic changes are needed as our contemporary food system is failing to deliver the food we increasingly demand.
PAEPARD appuie et assiste trois consortiums de recherche liés à l’aflatoxine dans leur travail destiné à : (a) éradiquer les déchets de l’aflatoxine avant et après les récoltes dans la filière arachide au Malawi et en Zambie ; (b) développer des stratégies visant à réduire la contamination par des toxines fongiques pour améliorer l’approvisionnement alimentaire, la nutrition et les revenus le long de la filière maïs dans les zones arides et semi-arides de l’est du Kenya ; et (c) développer des protocoles de gestion des aliments du bétail pour les producteurs laitiers dans les zones à forte
Les partisans de la souveraineté alimentaire veulent développer les agricultures locales, tandis que les avocats de la libéralisation vantent les bienfaits d’un approvisionnement à moindre coût sur les marchés. Les premiers pensent que les Etats doivent définir leur politique agricole pour répondre aux besoins de leurs populations, les seconds préfèrent le concept de « sécurité alimentaire », affirmant qu’il reconnaît aussi à chaque citoyen le droit de se nourrir à sa faim. Le combat pour la souveraineté a du mal à s’imposer dans l’arène politique.