These proceedings include all the papers presented during the AISA workshop either as oral papers or as posters. It also includes the edited text resulting from the Living Keynote process, an innovation in itself.
The AISA workshop was held on 29-31 May 2013 in Nairobi, Kenya, as part of an international week devoted to Agricultural innovation in Africa. The AISA workshop focused on active social learning among participants, developed a collective "living keynote" about the following issues:

Based on eleven case studies from Africa, Asia, and Latin America, this report describes farmer-led research findings and their dissemination, and analyzes available evidence on the impact of farmer-led approaches to agricultural research and development on rural livelihoods, local capacity to innovate and adapt, and influence on governmental institutions of agricultural research and development.

The history of agricultural research and development (R&D) has never been static. Its philosophies, concepts and principles continue to change and to impact on present-day practices. It is imperative to understand and draw lessons from the old and new perspectives, which inform agricultural R&D processes and policy formulation in developing countries. The interest of this paper is, therefore, to draw relevant lessons that can explain the dynamics,of the innovation systems at the grassroots in sub-Saharan Africa in particular.

The project “Strengthening Community Resilience to Change: Combining Local Innovative Capacity with Scientific Research” (CLIC–SR), supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, was completed on 31 August 2016. During the four years since 2012, the Prolinnova Country Platforms in Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda made large strides in:

Mainstream agricultural research has focused primarily on technical and biological aspects and is aimed at controlling or manipulating nature through the use of external inputs, such as
agricultural chemicals or super seed. In developing countries, the results of this research have benefited some resource-rich farmers in well-endowed areas, were suitable to only a limited
extent for poorer farmers in the more favourable areas, and were - in most cases - completely inappropriate for small-scale farmers in marginal areas, e.g. in the mountains or the drylands.