Agricultural production is a crucial and fundamental aspect of a stable society in China that depends heavily on the climate situation. With the desire to achieve future sustainable development, China’s government is taking actions to adapt to climate change and to ensure food self-sufficiency.
Rather than merely supporting R&D and strengthening innovation systems, the focus of innovation policy is currently shifting towards addressing societal challenges by transforming socio-economic systems. A particular trend within the emerging era of transformative innovation policy is the pursuit of challenge-based innovation missions, such as achieving a 50 % circular economy by 2030. By formulating clear and ambitious societal goals, policy makers are aiming to steer the directionality and adoption of innovation.
Grand societal challenges, such as global warming, can only be adequately dealt with through wide-ranging changes in technology, production and consumption, and ways of life, that is, through innovation. Furthermore, change will involve a variety of sectors or parts of the economy and society, and these change processes must be sufficiently consistent in order to achieve the desired results. This poses huge challenges for policy-making. This paper focus on implications for the governance of innovation policy, i.e., policies influencing a country’s innovation performance.
Although Colombia has the potential to be a cocoa producer for fine flavor and high value markets, it is not greatly recognized as such. In spite of the government’s interest to position the country as a major specialty cocoa producer, no strategic actions have been taken to develop and strengthen this aspect of the value chain.
The latest comprehensive research agenda in the Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension was published in 2012 (Faure, Desjeux, and Gasselin 2012), and since then there have been quite some developments in terms of biophysical, ecological, climatological, social, political and economic trends that impact farming and the transformation of agriculture and food systems at large as well as new potentially disruptive technologies.
The building of sustainable innovation capabilities in Africa requires an innovation system capable of producing, disseminating and using new knowledge. This paper assesses the process of constructing the National Innovation System (NIS) in Rwanda. It is posited that consensus on and acceptance of the concept of NIS among stakeholders is crucial in the early process of constructing an efficient and dynamic innovation system. Primary empirical data are presented for the case of Rwanda and analyzed in a regional context.
This paper calls for a better integration of place-based, evidence-based and inclusive dimensions in the implementation of the Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) plans and industrial policies in sub-Saharan Africa. To this end, the analysis contrasts with and takes inspiration from the recent and ongoing international experiences in the elaboration of Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (S3).
Innovation rests not only on discovery but also on cooperation and interactive learning. In agriculture, forestry and related sectors, multi-actor partnerships for ‘co-innovation’ occur in many forms, from international projects to informal ‘actor configurations’. Common attributes are that they include actors with ‘complementary forms of knowledge’ who collaborate in an innovation process, engage with a ‘larger periphery’ of stakeholders in the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System (AKIS) and are shaped by institutions.
The merger of Dow and DuPont, the acquisition of Syngenta by Chem- China, and the acquisition of Monsanto by Bayer have recently reshaped the global seed and biotech industry and caused concern about growing mar- ket concentration. This review documents market concentration in seed and agricultural biotech markets and discusses its causes and impacts. The avail- able evidence suggests that concentration in seed markets varies strongly by crop and by country, while markets for biotech traits are considerably more concentrated.
The adoption of genome editing depends among others, on a clear and navigable regulatory framework that renders consistent decisions. Some countries like the United States decided to deregulate specific transgene-free genome edited products that could be created through traditional breeding and are not considered to be plant pests, while others are still challenged to fit emerging technologies in their regulatory system.