Extension and advisory services (EAS) perform an important role in agricultural development and help reduce hunger and poverty. Development efforts are increasingly complicated because of challenges such as natural resource depletion and climate change. Agricultural development frameworks have moved from a linear to a more complex systems perspective. Many scholars today use the agricultural innovation systems (AIS) framework as a conceptual model.
There is plenty of information available in the public domain that covers various aspects of extension and know-how about new methodologies for implementation. However this information is often scattered and presented in complex academic language. Hence practitioners, who often have very limited time and/or may only have basic formal education, find it difficult to make use of this information. The Global Good Practices Initiative aims to bridge this gap by providing information about extension approaches and methods in easy-to-understand formats.
Development is the process of change and facilitation helps in accelerating this process through the change agents‘ or the extension service provider. While working with farmers, agri-traders and processors, facilitation refers to promote group learning, building consensus and enhancing participation in collective actions. A facilitator has multidimensional roles to play.
Within the last four years, a number of high profile reports outlining new strategies for pulling African agriculture out of its current impasse have emerged. These include the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme of NEPAD, and the InterAcademy Council Report commissioned by UN Secretary General Koffi Annan.
Numerous innovation platforms have been implemented to encourage the adoption of agricultural innovations and stakeholder interactions within a value chain. Yet little research has been undertaken on the design and implementation of innovation platforms focussing on issues other than market access and aiming to encourage agro-ecological intensification.
Precision agriculture (PA) is growing considerably in Brazil. However, there is a lack of information regarding to PA adoption and use in the country. This study sought to: (i) investigate the perception of growers and service dealership about PA technologies; (ii) identify constraints to PA adoption; (iii) obtain information that might be useful to motivate producers and agronomists to use PA technologies in the crop production systems.
Innovation Platforms (IPs) have become a popular vehicle in agricultural research for development (AR4D). The IP promise is that integrating scientific and local knowledge results in innovations that can have impact at scale. Many studies have uncovered how IPs work in various countries, value chains and themes. The conclusion is clear: IPs generate enthusiasm and can bring together stakeholders to effectively address specific problems and achieve ‘local’ impact.
Although much has been written on how to implement and facilitate innovation platforms efficiently, few studies support ex-ante appraisal of when and for what purpose innovation platforms provide an appropriate mechanism for achieving development outcomes, and what kinds of human and financial resource investments and enabling environments are required. Without these insights, innovation platforms run the risk of being promoted as a panacea for all problems in the agricultural sector.
The globalisation of agrifood systems is a mega-trend with potentially profound nutritional implications. This paper describes various facets of this globalisation process and reviews studies on nutritional effects with a particular focus on developing countries. Results show that global trade and technological change in agriculture have substantially improved food security in recent decades, although intensified production systems have also contributed to environmental problems in some regions.
Objective
The association between farm production diversity and dietary diversity in rural smallholder households was recently analysed. Most existing studies build on household-level dietary diversity indicators calculated from 7d food consumption recalls. Herein, this association is revisited with individual-level 24 h recall data. The robustness of the results is tested by comparing household- and individual-level estimates. The role of other factors that may influence dietary diversity, such as market access and agricultural technology, is also analysed.