Competing models of innovation informing agricultural extension, such as transfer of technology, participatory extension and technology development, and innovation systems have been proposed over the last decades. These approaches are often presented as antagonistic or even mutually exclusive. This article shows how practitioners in a rural innovation system draw on different aspects of all three models, while creating a distinct local practice and discourse. We revisit and deepen the critique of Vietnam’s “model” approach to upland rural development, voiced a decade ago in this journal.
Agriculture provides the principle source of livelihood for more than 80% of its 170 million people, and is the backbone of the Bangladesh economy. The government acknowledges this in its strategy to 2041, with investment in research and extension. CDAIS began in 2015. At the outset, however, the need to also invest in strengthening functional capacities was not recognised by those used to the ‘traditional’ technology transfer model.
This book is the re-titled third edition of the widely used Agricultural Extension (van den Ban & Hawkins, 1988, 1996). Building on the previous editions,Communication for Rural Innovation maintains and adapts the insights and conceptual models of value today, while reflecting many new ideas, angles and modes of thinking concerning how agricultural extension is taught and carried through today.
Various authors have identified the potential relevance of innovation system approaches for inclusive innovation, that is, the means by which new goods and services are developed for and by the poor. However, it is still a question how best to operationalize this. Innovation platforms (IPs) represent an example of putting an inclusive innovation system approach into practice by bringing different types of stakeholders together to address issues of mutual concern and interest with a specific focus on the marginalized poor.
One option for practically applying innovation systems thinking involves the establishment of innovation platforms (IPs). Such platforms are designed to bring together a variety of different stakeholders to exchange knowledge and resources and take action to solve common problems. Yet relatively little is known about how IPs operate in practice, particularly how power dynamics influence platform processes.This paper focuses on a research-for-development project in the Ethiopian highlands which established three IPs for improved natural resource management.
More than 25 years after the first implementation of Farmer Field Schools (FFS), there is a rich corpus of evidence that participation in FFS improves farmers’ knowledge, skills, and competencies. On the other hand, several studies converge to show that FFS, by strengthening group action, have the potential to build-up social capital among participants and, thereafter, within local communities.
In order to realize the potential of agricultural innovation in family farming, national priorities of sustainably increasing food production and productivity, and reducing hunger and poverty, require rural knowledge institutions to be stronger and communication processes to be improved. This brief synthesizes the focus of FAO’s research and extension branch on transforming agricultural innovation systems of member countries.
Asterio P. Saliot, National Director of the Agricultural Training Institute (Department of Agriculture, Philippines), presented the RAS context of his country at the 3rd GFRAS Annual Meeting, "The Role of Rural Advisory Services in Agricultural Innovation Systems", 26-28 September 2012, Philippines.
The presentation describes the role of extension, key players and capacities needed within the context of the Philippine Agricultural Innovation System.
They were once the central element in state-funded research, but now the research bodies need to redefine their role as partners in the innovation process, responding more efficiently to the needs of society and businesses. In agriculture, the concept of innovation was dominated in the past by linear knowledge transfer in the form of new technologies that were essentially generated by public research (research institutes or universities), transferred to the agricultural extension services, and hence to the farmers for adoption.
To meet multiple environmental objectives, integrated programming is becoming increasingly important for the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). Integration of multiple environmental, social and economic objectives also contributes to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in a timely and cost-effective way. However, integration is often not well defined. This report therefore focuses on identifying key aspects of integration and assessing their implementation in natural resources management projects.