In the framework of a wide Foresight process, launched by the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR) and aiming to identify possible scenarios for European agriculture in a 20-year perspective, DG RTD/E of the European Commission established a high-level Consultancy Expert Group (CEG) that analysed and synthesised foresight information in order to provide research policy orientations, tacking stock of the report from the first Foresight Expert Group (FEG) published in February 2007.
This document sets out how EU Research and Innovation (R&I) policy contributes to the major global challenge of ensuring food and nutrition security (FNS). It is a first step in the further development of a more coherent approach to European R&I which aims at mobilising resources and stakeholders to set out aligned R&I agendas in response to recent international political drivers such as the Sustainable Development Goals and the COP 21 climate commitments.
La présente note a pour objet de donner des éléments aux décideurs, au niveau national, pour leur permettre de procéder à des évaluations et de prendre les mesures voulues concernant la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition face au changement climatique. Elle comprend des informations générales sur l’effet que le changement climatique et la variabilité du climat ont sur les secteurs de l’agriculture et la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition et sur la façon dont ces secteurs et les habitudes alimentaires contribuent aux émissions de gaz à effet de serre.
This evaluation seeks to understand the impact which certain measures of the CAP have had on reducing GHG emissions, agriculture’s vulnerability to climate change and its ability to provide adaptation and mitigation services to society. Most of the CAP measures analysed do not have climate action as their intended purpose but may have it as a secondary purpose. Some, such as those which sustain certain forms of agricultural production responsible for emissions, exist for economic, social and sometimes other environmental reasons.
This publication, consisting of several modules, includes participatory research approaches for examining a wide range of questions regarding if and how farming practices are being modified to deal with a changing environment, and the constraints and opportunities these changes pose for both men and women.
The aim of this report is to provide a detailed review of documented social learning processes for climate changeand natural resource managementas described in peer-reviewed literature. Particular focus is on identifying (1) lessons and principles, (2) tools and approaches, (3) evaluation of social learning, as well as (4) concrete examples of impacts that social learning has contributed to.
The study report is based on case studies from Bangladesh (Sulaiman, 2010), Bolivia (Pafumi and Ulloa, 2010), DR Congo (Mbaye, 2010) and Ghana (Adjei-Nsiah and Dormon, 2010) which were carried out with the purpose of assessing needs and gaps with regard to the provision of innovation support services for climate change adaptation. It took the form of desk-studies complemented with key informant interviews.
The Sourcebook is the outcome of joint planning, continued interest in gender and agriculture, and concerted efforts by the World Bank, FAO, and IFAD. The purpose of the Sourcebook is to act as a guide for practitioners and technical staff inaddressing gender issues and integrating gender-responsive actions in the design and implementation of agricultural projects and programs. It speaks not with gender specialists on how to improve their skills but rather reaches out to technical experts to guide them in thinking through how to integrate gender dimensions into their operations.
African agriculture is currently at a crossroads, at which persistent food shortages are compounded by threats from climate change. But, as this book argues, Africa can feed itself in a generation and help contribute to global food security. To achieve this Africa has to define agriculture as a force in economic growth by: advancing scientific and technological research; investing in infrastructure; fostering higher technical training; and creating regional markets.
This report provides a synthesis of all findings and information generated through a “stocktaking” process that involved a desk study of Prolinnova documents and evaluation reports, a questionnaire to 40 staff members of international organizations in agricultural research and development (ARD), self-assessment by the Country Platforms (CPs) and backstopping visits to five CPs. In 2014, the Prolinnova network saw a need to re-strategise in a changing context, and started this process by reviewing the activities it had undertaken and assessing its own functioning.