This study presents a framework of climate smart agriculture (CSA) priority setting methodology for identifying and developing portfolios of options based on local stakeholders' responses to CSA technologies. The methodology uses a participatory prioritization framework which is widely used in the development sector This study has modified the existing participatory framework to indicator based prioritization of CSA technologies.
Participatory approaches have been discussed as alternatives to and complementary elements of more conventional research on sustainable land use and rural development in upland areas of Southeast Asia. Following a brief overview of the history of participatory approaches (Sect. 9.1), this chapter discusses the potential and limitations of applying Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools to field research practice in Vietnam (Sect. 9.2) and of involving stakeholders in priority setting, modeling and environmental valuation in the Southeast Asian uplands (Sect. 9.3).
Timely availability of reliable information on weather conditions, agro-advisories, and market information can help to minimize losses in agriculture. This paper presents a scientific and integrated approach to identify areas of high agriculture vulnerability to climate change and availability of ICT services for dissemination of Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) information in the vulnerable areas. This study was illustrated for India where the majority of the population depends on agriculture for their livelihoods, and this sector is highly vulnerable to climate change.
Agriculture in South Asia is vulnerable to climate change. Therefore, adaptation measures are required to sustain agricultural productivity, to reduce vulnerability, and to enhance the resilience of the agricultural system to climate change. There are many adaptation practices in the production systems that have been proposed and tested for minimizing the effects of climate change. Some socioeconomic and political setup contributes to adaptation, while others may inhibit it.
The general aims of this chapter are to provide an overview of the historical development of rural advisory and knowledge provision in Vietnam, and how legal frameworks have changed over time, demonstrate how more client-centered extension approaches can be translated and utilized at the field level, and focus on examples of novel approaches to knowledge generation and diffusion, those currently evolving due to initiatives driven by state, private and NGO actors, or developed within the framework of the Uplands Program.
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.
This paper attempts to identify the major factors associated with some of the failures and successes of integrated watershed management policies and projects with a particular emphasis on the uplands of mainland Southeast Asia. It argues that many policy measures have been misguided by failing to acknowledge the multi- dimensional facets of sustainable watershed management and putting too much emphasis on command-and-control approaches to resource management and one- size-fits-all conservation models.