Rather than merely supporting R&D and strengthening innovation systems, the focus of innovation policy is currently shifting towards addressing societal challenges by transforming socio-economic systems. A particular trend within the emerging era of transformative innovation policy is the pursuit of challenge-based innovation missions, such as achieving a 50 % circular economy by 2030. By formulating clear and ambitious societal goals, policy makers are aiming to steer the directionality and adoption of innovation.
So far, numerous studies have exhibited Silicon Valley and other thriving innovation ecosystems by distinguishing special characteristics in which their survival rely on sustaining activities that convert them to specific regions. These regions provide ready-made grounds for networking to be innovative. Meantime, it is struggling for innovations to be transformed into measurable economic results if players encounter a weak network of collaborative relationships in the ecosystem.
There is a broad consensus that farmers are not simply recipients of promoted techniques: rather, they are also an important source of agricultural innovations. They invent farm tools and equipment, develop new crop varieties, and add value to externally promoted technologies. When scouting, documenting and promoting such farmer-generated innovations, the thorny issue of intellectual property rights (IPRs) often emerges.
In an endeavor to promote agricultural innovation, the Government of India introduced two pieces of legislation: (i) the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001, which provide for the registration of traditional crop varieties as farmers' varieties, and for the sharing of benefits when those varieties are incorporated into new commercial varieties; and (ii) the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act 1999, which provides for the registration of indications to promote the marketing of goods which derive their quality and characteristics from th
Agricultural Innovation System (AIS) is a collection of institutions enabling agricultural and food system transformation in a country. Any attempt to engage in emergency interventions by institutions and bounce back with higher levels of resilience requires strong organizational and human capacity as a prerequisite. What role do these institutions play in emergencies such as COVID-19 and how can they bounce back after such a crisis is over? What can be done to help these institutions build resilience capacity for such recovery?
The interaction between the organization and the institutional environment leads to organizational change or innovation. As the basic industry of China’s national economy, agricultural enterprises are transmitted from the institutional environment to the internals of the enterprise and are transformed into innovative behaviors, which ultimately form performance.
The article presents indicators of the agricultural industry management system: doing business in a digital and technological transformation from the perspective of an ontological approach. It is important to note that it is impossible to transform under the requirements of the modern world without the introduction of innovation. However, innovation is always marked by financial costs and loss of time, which reduces the innovative activity of organizations in the agricultural sector, and, therefore, determines the diagnosis of innovation and investment policy.
The article emphasizes that for the innovative development of the Russian agricultural industry and ensuring the national food security, it is necessary to create a research and development sector in the field of food production; reform the education system for the innovative development of the agricultural industry; re-equip the agricultural industry; build a system of agricultural advisory support for producers; create an intellectual property protection system; improve legal standards for regulating innovation, research and development; pay attention to the needs of agriculture and agro-
The task of creating a single supranational payment market is to ensure its maximum independence, which correlates with the tasks of the competitive leading economic development of countries - the transition to a digital technological structure. To increase the efficiency of the generation of payment innovations with their subsequent diffusion into the agricultural sector, to strengthen the economy’s resistance to risks, a transfer of innovative institutional, organizational and informational forms of activity is necessary.
Farmer group institutions have been being a target group for various innovations in the agricultural development program. Unfortunately, the aspect of their institutional system is getting ignored frequently. This study aimed to know the farmer group institution performance’s determinant factors and its effect on the agricultural innovation implementation sustainability. This was a longitudinal study using a qualitative approach involving ten farmer group institutions (mixed crop-livestock farming) done in Lombok island.