Este estudio analizó la evolución de una red de innovación entre productores de hule natural durante tres periodos de observación (dos olas o tres años), y evaluó cómo los productores reaccionan a diferentes innovaciones en un momento dado. Las prácticas de innovación fueron agrupadas en tres actividades: control de plagas y enfermedades, establecimiento y manejo de plantaciones, y manejo de cosecha y poscosecha.
La extensión rural es un proceso de trabajo y acompañamiento con el productor orientado al desarrollo sostenible de sus capacidades. En México, se han adaptado una serie de modelos de extensión que van desde el norteamericano, implementado a principios de la década de 1980, hasta el modelo de hub o nodo de innovación (plataforma - módulo demostrativo - área de extensión), aplicado desde el 2010 en el marco del Programa MasAgro. El objetivo de este documento es analizar los diversos procesos de extensión en México.
Rural extension is a process of work and accompaniment with the producer aimed to sustainable development of their skills. In Mexico, a series of extension models have been adapted, that goes from the US, implemented in the early 1980’s, to the hub model or innovation node (platform - demonstration module - extension area) applied since 2010 under the MasAgro Program. The aim of this paper is to analyze the various processes of extension in Mexico.
This report documents the history of the systems of rice intensification (SRI, for short) in India in the last few years and presents some of the institutional changes and challenges that SRI throws up. The first part looks at the complex and continuing evolution of SRI in India and presents SRI as an innovation in process and not as a completed product. Farmers and other actors are continuously shaping it through their practice. Part II focuses on insights of the innovation systems framework looking closely at the nature and quality of linkages of the various actors.
Social learning in multi-actor innovation networks is increasingly considered an important precondition for addressing sustainability in regional development contexts. Social learning is seen as a means for enabling stakeholders to take advantage of the diversity in perspectives, interests and values for generating more sustainable practices and policies. Although more and more research is done on the meaning and manifestations of social learning, particularly in the context of natural resource management, little is known about the social dynamics in the process of social learning.
This Economic and Sector Work paper, “Enhancing Agricultural Innovation: How to Go Beyond the Strengthening of Research Systems,” was initiated as a result of the international workshop, “Development of Research Systems to Support the Changing Agricultural Sector,” organized by the Agriculture and Rural Development Department of the World Bank in June 2004 in Washington, DC.
This brief report lays out ten theories of advocacy and policy change. These theories are intended to articulate the policy making process and identify causal connections supported by research to explain how and why a change may or may not occur. It further provides examples of the way in which advocates, funders, and evaluators can use these theories in their work.
Institutional innovations are critical for effective performance of agricultural research centres in natural resource management projects that often include multiple and diverse stakeholders with contrasting objectives and activities. This report shows how institutional histories of projects can be used as tools to help reveal institutional innovations thereby promoting Institutional Learning And Change (ILAC).
The CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems (AAS) is a research in development program which aims to foster innovation to respond to community needs, and through networking and social learning to bring about development outcomes and impact at scale. It aims to reach the poorest and most vulnerable communities that are dependent upon aquatic agricultural systems. AAS uses monitoring and evaluation to track progress along identified impact pathways for accountability and learning.
This paper captures lessons from recent experiences on using ‘theories of change’ amongst organisations involved in the research–policy interface. The literature in this area highlights much of the complexity inherent in the policymaking process, as well as the challenges around finding meaningful ways to measure research uptake. As a tool, ‘theories of change’ offers much, but the paper argues that the very complexity and dynamism of the research-to-policy process means that any theory of change will be inadequate in this context.