The publication reviews forty years of development experience and concludes that donors and partner countries alike have tended to look at capacity development as mainly a technical process, or as a transfer of knowledge or institutions from North to South.
The Challenge of Capacity Development: Working Towards Good Practice draws on four decades of documented experience provided by both bilateral and multilateral donors, as well as academic specialists, to help policy makers and practitioners think through effective approaches to capacity development and what challenges remain in the drive to boost country capacity. The analysis is underpinned by a conceptual framework which guides practitioners to view capacity development at three interrelated levels: individual, organisational and enabling environment levels.
Ce document examine les approches suivies actuellement en ce qui concerne le renforcement des capacités commerciales dans les pays africains. Ce but est de:
Identifier des mécanismes permettant de promouvoir un processus de formulation de la politique commerciale de type participatif et de l’intégrer dans les stratégies nationales de développement et de lutte contre la pauvret.
Etudier le rôle que pourraient jouer les donneurs en facilitant et en soutenant le processus d’élaboration de la politique commerciale.
Le présent document a reconnu l’existence d’un consensus international croissant au sujet de l’importance de l’objectif de renforcement des capacités et de la façon dont il a des chances d’être réalisé. L’accent a été mis sur la reconnaissance du fait que le renforcement des capacités est un processus endogène, sur l’importance de l’appropriation des politiques nationales qui en résulte, et sur la nécessité pour les donneurs de se limiter à encourager et à soutenir les efforts du pays.
Ce document offre un cadre de réflexion sur le renforcement des capacités, établi à partir des principaux enseignements tirés de l’expérience, qu’elle soit positive ou négative.
This paper makes a contribution to understanding the impact of relational trust, as embodied within bonding, bridging and linking social capital, on rural innovation. Using cases of multi-stakeholder groups who work together on shared problems it explores how social capital and different forms of trust (companion, competence and commitment) influence rural innovation processes. Looking at both the ‘bright’ and ‘dark’ side of social capital, our focus is on how social capital and trust constrain and enable the process of innovation.
This paper makes a contribution to understanding the impact of relational trust, as embodied within bonding, bridging and linking social capital, on rural innovation. Using cases of multi-stakeholder groups who work together on shared problems it explores how social capital and different forms of trust (companion, competence and commitment) influence rural innovation processes. Looking at both the ‘bright’ and ‘dark’ side of social capital, our focus is on how social capital and trust constrain and enable the process of innovation.
This paper addresses this gap by examining the nature of disruption to farm advisors from data-driven smart farming and identifies the challenges and opportunities. The authors aim to better theorize smart farming innovation by examining the advisory role to provide insights for technology developers, and policy directions for governments in relation to supporting uptake of farming innovations.
In this paper is presented insights from a co-design process with private farm advisers and ask: What enables farm advisers to engage with digital innovation? And, how can digital innovation be supported and practiced in smart farming contexts? Digital innovation presents challenges for farmers and advisers due to the new relationships, skills, arrangements, techniques and devices required to realise value for farm production and profitability from digital tools and services.
The privatization of agricultural advisory and extension services in many countries and the associated pluralism of service providers has renewed interest in farmers’ use of fee-for-service advisors. Understanding farmers’ use of advisory services is important, given the role such services are expected to play in helping farmers address critical environmental and sustainability challenges. This paper aims to identify factors associated with farmers’ use of fee-for service advisors and bring fresh conceptualization to this topic.