This chapter outlines the role of a well-functioning agricultural innovation system in ensuring good use of public funds, and higher responsiveness to the needs of ‘innovation consumers’ through improved collaboration between public and private participants, including across national borders. A well-functioning agricultural innovation system is key to improving the economic, environmental and social performance of the food and agriculture sector.
This chapter analyses the functioning of the Brazilian agricultural innovation system. It discusses the role of the different actors and describes governance mechanisms to define priorities and evaluate performance. It analyses trends in agricultural R&D expenditure and sources of funding, the role of intellectual property protection in fostering knowledge markets, and outlines mechanisms used to facilitate knowledge transfers, including collaboration at the national level and the adoption of innovation at the farm or firm level.
Depuis plusieurs décennies, les pays de l’Afrique de l’Ouest se sont investis dans le développement et la diffusion des innovations agricoles dans le but d’accroître la productivité agricole et la production vivrière en particulier. Plusieurs mécanismes et approches ont été développés à cet effet en vue d’une utilisation efficace de ces innovations agricoles par les producteurs.
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.
This briefing considers the status, systems, instruments and institutions underpinning agricultural innovation and research for development (ARD) globally and in the ACP countires. It puts a strong emphasis on lessons learnt and opportunities for successful agricultural innovation, based on broad range of interventions at different levels of the agricultural value chain. It analyses participatory innovation processes to find more efficient and effective modes of agricultural research and technology development benefiting farmers and rural communities.
The Guidance Note on Operationalization provides a brief recap of the conceptual underpinnings and principles of the TAP Common Framework as well as a more detailed guide to operationalization of the proposed dual pathways approach. It offers also a strategy for monitoring and evaluation as well as a toolbox of select tools that may be useful at the different stages of the CD for AIS cycle.
The Conceptual Background provides an in-depth analysis of the conceptual underpinnings and principles of the TAP Common Framework. It is also available in French and Spanish.
This publication represents a synthesis of assessments of national agricultural innovation systems in countries of Central Asia, South Caucasus and Turkey. The first chapter gives an introduction of the project “Capacity Development for Analysis and Strengthening of Agricultural Innovation Systems in Central Asia and Turkey”, out of which the current publication reports about one of the project outputs achieved.
The first phase in the development of the Common Framework on Capacity Development for Agricultural Innovation systems (CD for AIS) consisted of the review of the existing literature, building up a repository of relevant documentation on agricultural innovation in general and AIS and CD for AIS. This report summarizes this first phase. In particular, Section 1 covers this brief introduction. Sections two and three focus on the review of relevant literature, presenting the methodology used and the structure of the repository itself.
In innovation studies, communication received explicit attention in the context of studies on the adoption and diffusion of innovation that dominated the field in the 1940‐1970 period. Since then, our theoretical understanding of both innovation and communication has changed markedly. However, a systematic rethinking of the role of communication in innovation processes is largely lacking. This article reconceptualises the role of everyday communication and communicative intervention in innovation processes, and discusses practical implications.