Managers and policy makers have struggled to develop effective monitoring systems to track the evolution of research organizations. This paper presents the first components of a novel monitoring system for monitoring such organizations. These components can be used to generate detailed static pictures of the actual activities and partnerships of a large research program or organization, in other words, what the organization is actually doing, with whom, where, how and for what purpose.
The increasing complexity of technology development and adoption is rapidly changing the effectiveness of scientific and technological policies. Complex technologies are developed and disseminated by networks of agents. The impact of these networks depends on the assets they command, their learning routines, the socio-economic environment in which they operate and their history.
Agricultural education, research, and extension can contribute substantially to reducing rural poverty in the developing world. However, evidence suggests that their contributions are falling short in Sub-Saharan Africa. The entry of new actors, technologies, and market forces, when combined with new economic and demographic pressures, suggests the need for more innovative and less linear approaches to promoting a technological transformation of smallholder agriculture.
This paper examines the role of postsecondary agricultural education and training (AET) in sub-Saharan Africa in the context of the region’s agricultural innovation systems. Specifically, the paper looks at how AET in sub-Saharan Africa can contribute to agricultural development by strengthening innovative capacity, or the ability of individuals and organisations to introduce new products and processes that are socially or economically relevant, particularly with respect to smallholder farmers who represent the largest group of agricultural producers in the region.
The article provides a conceptual framework and discusses research methods for analyzing pluralistic agricultural advisory services. The framework can also assist policy-makers in identifying reform options. It addresses the following question: Which forms of providing and financing agricultural advisory services work best in which situation? The framework ‘disentangles’ agricultural advisory services by distinguishing between (1) governance structures, (2) capacity, (3) management, and (4) advisory methods.
Several posters have been created on the occasion of the 5th TAP Partners Assembly (Laos, 20-22 September 2017) to show recent activities and achievements in the eight pilot countries of the CDAIS project.
Several posters have been created on the occasion of the 5th TAP Partners Assembly (Laos, 20-22 September 2017) to show recent activities and achievements in the eight pilot countries of the CDAIS project.
As part of the Capacity Development for Agricultural Innovation System Project (CDAIS) a Policy Dialogue process is being implemented in the 8 pilot countries.
The purposes of the Policy Dialogue is to contribute to the improvement of the process of development or implementation of policies that promote agricultural innovation through improved dialogue and interaction among key stakeholders and, ultimately to contribute to the enhancement of the enabling environment for agricultural innovation.
These guidelines have been elaborated by the CDAIS project to organize policy consultations at national level. In particular, they can be used by project teams (e.g. project managers, facilitators, policy consultants) for the planning of national policy dialogue events to discuss policy related issues emerged during the local consultations at innovation partnership level and require attention of national policy makers.
These guidelines have been elaborated by the CDAIS project to organize policy consultations at innovation partnership level. They can be used by project teams (e.g. project managers, facilitators, policy consultants) to plan and conduct workshops with representatives of the innovation partnership to discuss policy related issues that hinder the innovation process in a particular partnership.