The question of how agricultural research can best be used for developmental purposes is a topic of some debate in developmental circles. The idea that this is simply a question of better transfer of ideas from research to farmers has been largely discredited. Agricultural innovation is a process that takes a multitude of different forms, and, within this process, agricultural research and expertise are mobilised at different points in time for different purposes. This paper uses two key analytical principles in order to find how research is actually put into use.
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.
In the AgriSpin project (2015-2017) fifteen organisations involved in innovation support tried to understand better how each of them made a difference in helping farmers to innovate. In principle, each partner organisation hosted a Cross Visits of 3 – 4 days, to present a number of interesting innovation cases in which it was involved. The visiting team, composed of colleagues from other partner organisations, interviewed key actors in each case, and gave feedback about pearls, puzzlings and proposals in these innovation processes.
As part of the EU funded AgriSpin project (www.agrispin.eu), which aimed at “creating space for innovations” in agriculture across Europe, this contribution addresses the above mentioned knowledge gaps by a. elaborating a generic typology appropriate to capture the variety of ISS, b. structuring selected innovations along the degree of technological change and coordination levels, and c.
The objective of this piece of work is to explore innovation support in the case of Greece which is a particular one given the demise, on the one hand, of the country's public extension service in the early 1990's - and since then the absence of any kind of organized extension intervention in the country, and, on the other hand, of the agricultural cooperatives; thus the extremely weak and fragmented nature of the Greek Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System which seems to be rather unique in the European Union
In the context of the SALSA project, the overall aim of WP6 is to identify, develop and disseminate policy tools and other support mechanisms that are most appropriate for maintaining and enhancing the contribution of small farms to sustainable FNS in the European and African context (SALSA Objective 4).
The current deliverable (D6.1) is divided into two parts, each corresponding to one of its two main audiences, namely:
The current deliverable (D6.2) is divided into two parts each corresponding to one of its two main audiences, namely:
Part 1 – Scientific Methodology
SALSA Deliverable 6.3 is described in the project Description of Action (DoA) as a single Policy Brief but has been delivered as a set of five documents. These consist of:
It is clear that any definition of a small farm needs to be based on national and regional realities. Definitions involving only the criterion of farm size have universal appeal as they are relatively easy to apply and allow simple comparisons across countries and world regions. However, they don't capture all the complexities of farming. Definitions involving additional criteria to farm size are more meaningful, particularly those including indicators of the farm economic output, but data availability is often a limitation (Ruane, 2016).
This book contains a collection of papers that discuss the experience of an Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D) capacity building program in Papua New Guinea (PNG). The program was the AusAID-funded Agricultural Research and Development Support Facility (ARDSF), which ran for fi ve years from 2007 to 2012, and which sought to improve the delivery of services by agricultural research organisations to smallholder farmers.