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.
The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) and the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) initiated a 5 year project in June 2004 with the financial assistance from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). The project, entitled: “Improving productivity and market success” (IPMS) of Ethiopian farmers, aims at contributing to a reduction in poverty of the rural poor through market oriented agricultural development.
Uganda pioneered the use of budget support operations known as Poverty Reduction Support Credits (PRSCs) in the World Bank. PRSCs were designed to channel programmatic lending to support policy and institutional reforms in support of a country's Poverty Reduction Strategy, usually presented in the form of a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). In the case of Uganda the PRSCs were designed as a series of annual credits supporting a three year rolling program of reforms, based on Uganda's version of a PRSC, which is known as the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) .
Coordinated formal efforts to generate technologies for enhancing agricultural development in Ethiopia was mainly rooted in formal research and development institutions up to very recently. A number of improved technologies have been generated wlth the efforts made so far and the superiority of some of the technologies over the traditional practices has already been proved, at least for the major commodities.
The livelihoods of mountain farmers are often constrained by poor access to markets and limited entrepreneurial skills for adding value to produce. Research and development organizations have now recognized that improving market access and enhancing the ability of resource-poor mountain farmers to diversify their links with markets are among the most pressing challenges in mountain agriculture.
Since 1991, there have been significant changes in utilization of feed resources in the Ethiopian highlands: while use of communal grazing lands and private pastures has declined, use of crop residues and purchased feed has increased. In addition, although use of animal health services and adoption of improved livestock breeds and modern management practices have increased, ownership of various types of livestock has declined.
Empirical studies on agricultural technology adoption generally divide a population into adopters and nonadopters, and analyse the reasons for adoption or nonadoption at a point in time. In reality, technology adoption is not a one-off static decision, rather it involves a dynamic process in which information gathering, learning and experience play pivotal roles, particularly in the early stage of adoption. A conceptual framework for an adoption pathway is suggested in which farmers move from learning to adoption, to continuous or discontinuous use over time.
Inadequate feed and nutrition are major constraints to livestock production in sub-Saharan Africa. National and international research agencies, including the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), have developed several feed production and utilisation technologies. However, adoption of these technologies has so far been low. Identification of the major socio-economic and policy factors influencing the adoption of improved feed technologies is required to help design policy and institutional interventions to improve adoption.
This report is concerned with the ‘who?’ ‘what?’ and ‘how?’ of pro-poor extension. It builds on the analytical framework proposed in the Inception Report of the same study (Christoplos, Farrington and Kidd, 2001), taking it forward by fleshing out the analysis with empirical information gathered from several countries during the course of the study (from primary data in Bolivia, Colombia, Nicaragua, Uganda and Vietnam, and from secondary sources in a range of other countries, including India), and drawing conclusions on the scope for action by governments and donors in a range of contexts.