These initiatives generated transformative and lasting results and contributed to the strengthening of local public policies and economic growth. Using very few resources and focusing on agroecological and inclusive production methods, these women have become role models in their communities and beyond. Empowered women can participate more actively in their communities and foster inclusive local policies that will ultimately drive more sustainable and just rural development.
En matière de semences, on oppose souvent un modèle orienté vers le business à un modèle orienté vers l’agriculture paysanne. Ces deux modèles ont des implications socio-économiques différentes, aussi bien en termes d’emplois, que d’autonomie des agriculteurs ou de biodiversité. Les agricultures paysannes des pays du Sud ont-elles le poids et l’influence politique nécessaires pour faire prévaloir leurs modèles semenciers ? C’est la question que nous explorons dans ce dossier.
En este capítulo se describen las experiencias logradas en el proyecto conducido por Embrapa (a través de Embrapa Caprinos y Ovinos y Embrapa Semiárido) e ICARDA (2004-2008) en dos núcleos de intervención, en las comunidades de Boa Vista-Quixadá y Boqueirão, localizadas en los estados de Ceará y Pernambuco, respectivamente, además de las lecciones aprendidas que se espera sean de utilidad a iniciativas y esfuerzos similares en otras áreas de la región
Les Nations unies ont désigné 2014 comme l’Année internationale de l’agriculture familiale. À l’échelle de la planète, la population agricole est estimée à 2,6 milliards de personnes, soit 40 % de la population totale. Avec 1,3 milliard d’actifs, l’agriculture demeure le premier secteur d’emploi au niveau mondial. Dans les pays en développement, là où 70% de la population reste liée aux activités agricoles, l’alimentation des familles dépend essentiellement de la production vivrière et des marchés locaux. Aujourd’hui, défendre l’agriculture familiale ne suffit plus.
This paper was presented at the Farmer First Revisited: 20 Years On conference at IDS, University of Sussex, UK, December 2007. Its focus is the challenge of strengthening agricultural innovation systems. The paper prefaces this discussion by reflecting on an apparent paradox. While agricultural innovation has never been better studied and understood, many of our ideas about innovation have failed to fundamentally change the institutional and policy setting of public and private investment intended to promote innovation for development.
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.
The emergence of a globalised knowledge economy, and the contemporary views of innovation capacity that this trend enables and informs, provides a new context in which development assistance to agricultural research and development needs to be considered. The main argument in this paper, which focuses on The Netherlands, is that development assistance should use this emerging scenario to identify niches where inputs can add value to the R&D investments of others, particularly in activities that help wire up innovation systems, linking R&D to other activities and actors in society.
The universal application of the T&V model of agricultural extension in more than 50 countries is one of agricultural development’s best known failures. The approach worked well in places where it was originally developed, but proved inappropriate almost everywhere else. In this report Rasheed Sulaiman V. and Andy Hall worry that an apparently successful extension innovation piloted in India is set to suffer a similar fate.
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.
This paper was prepared to present at the Farmer First Revisited: 20 Years On conference at the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK, December, 2007. Its focus is the challenge of strengthening agricultural innovation systems. The paper prefaces this discussion by reflecting on an apparent paradox. While agricultural innovation has never been better studied and understood, many of our ideas about innovation have failed to fundamentally change the institutional and policy setting of public and private investment intended to promote innovation for development.