This synthesis report presents the outputs of the workshop organised by CTA at its headquarters in Wageningen, The Netherlands, 15-17 July 2008. The outputs are presented in two main parts, each corresponding to one of the workshop objectives, and ends with a section on the way forward as suggested by the workshop participants. It also includes a first attempt to come to a consolidated generic framework on AIS performance indicators, based on the outputs of the different working groups.
This report compiles country-reports that describe the agri-food research landscape in 2006/2007 in 33 countries associated to the 6th Framework Programme (FP6), which defined the European for the period from 2002 to 2006. Each country-report presents information about the main research players in 2006/2007 and about the current trends and the future needs for research topics and for the organisation of the agri-food research system.
This document provides a review of existing reports regarding the agri-food research landscape in 2006/2007 for 14 EU countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkey) and also explores trends and needs in other EU or associated countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The Netherlands, United Kingdom).
The ‘Mapping Report’ is the synthesis of the statistical information and the survey results available to describe agrifood research in European countries. The main source of information was the results of a bibliometric analysis (in the EU-33 countries), a web-assisted survey (in the EU-12+2 countries) and the country reports (for the EU-15 countries) prepared in the AgriMapping project frame in 2006 and 2007. When relevant, available complementary statistics were also used.
Grants for agricultural innovation are common but grant funds specifically targeted to smallholder farmers remain relatively rare. Nevertheless, they are receiving increasing recognition as a promising venue for agricultural innovation. They stimulate smallholders to experiment with improved practices, to become proactive and to engage with research and extension providers. The systematic review covered three modalities of disbursing these grants to smallholder farmers and their organisations: vouchers, competitive grants and farmer-led innovation support funds.
Les conséquences sur les territoires des changements climatiques d’origine anthropique sont variables dans leurs expressions comme dans leurs effets, et les territoires sont inégaux face à ces variations climatiques en termes d’exposition aux effets (fonction de facteurs physiques, sociaux, économiques, culturels, politiques, etc.) comme en termes de capacité de réponse (capacité d’appréhension, d’anticipation, de réparation, etc.).
L’enjeu environnemental pour les territoires croît de façon exponentielle depuis une décennie. Les décideurs politiques s’emparent de cette mouvance et favorisent des actions qui entrent dans le projet dit durable. La Région Île-de-France choisit en partie de baser son développement territorial sur l’idéologie de l’« urban greening ». Elle met en œuvre des actions pour devenir la première Écorégion d’Europe d’ici une demi-douzaine d’années et, pour ce, favorise les mesures agro-environnementales. Un des piliers de ce développement est l’agriculture biologique.
L’alimentation en eau et la protection des milieux aquatiques sont confrontées aux pollutions diffuses d’origine agricole dans le nord-ouest de la France. Les politiques de gestion des ressources en eau s’appuient à présent sur la participation des agriculteurs afin de concevoir des solutions adaptées aux territoires. En effet, si la réglementation est nécessaire, elle n’est pas suffisante pour atteindre une qualité satisfaisante sur de nombreux bassins versants fortement pollués par les nitrates, le phosphore ou les produits phytosanitaires.
This paper shows there is a fundamental significance of Social Learning to agricultural innovation, which can be operationalized by framing agricultural innovation as changes in understanding, practices and relationships. The use of Social Learning as a design framework supports the emergence of agricultural innovations that bring equitable benefits, are sustainable and are innovated in context.
This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion in the scientific literature on the advantages and disadvantages of privatization of extension and advisory services and the shift from thinking in terms of the traditional Agricultural Knowledge System towards a broader Agricultural Innovation System.