En esta sección se retrata como se hace y vive la agroecología en un contexto campesino rural. Desde una comunidad en las Lomas del Escambray (prov. Villa Clara) se intenta transmitir el corazón y la energía de la agroecología en Cuba, a la vez que mostrar el funcionamiento del MACAC, las prácticas cotidianas y las reflexiones de los/as protagonistas.
Cette partie a pour objectif de retracer l’histoire de la création de l’agroécologie et de comprendre les conditions qui lui permettent d’exister dans un contexte paysan rural. Depuis ces mêmes fermes, les protagonistes essayent de transmettre le sentiment et le cœur de l’agroécologie tout en laissant voir le fonctionnement du MACAC, les pratiques quotidiennes et les réflexions de chaque protagoniste.
This section intends to picture how is agroecology done and lived in a rural peasant context. From their own plantations they try to carry over the feeling and heart of agroecology, while showing the operation of PTPAM at the same time, the everyday practices and the thoughts of their main players.
Cette publication offre de nombreux exemples concrets détaillant différentes manières de réengager les jeunes dans le secteur agricole. Elle montre à quel point des programmes éducationnels sur mesure peuvent offrir aux jeunes les compétences et la perspicacité nécessaires pour se lancer en agriculture et adopter des méthodes de production respectueuses de l’environnement. Beaucoup des approches ou des initiatives décrites dans cette publication sont issues des jeunes eux-mêmes.
Many indigenous vegetables are generally underutilized across different cultures, but they remain alternatives to exotic vegetables that often are expensive. This study investigated effects of participation in indigenous vegetable production on livelihood of farmers. Multistaged sampling was used to collect data from 222 vegetable farmers sampled from using a semi-structured questionnaire. Principal component analysis and endogenous switching regression (ESR) were employed for analysis
This paper briefly reviews three conceptual frameworks: namely, the national agricultural research system (NARS), the agricultural knowledge and information system (AKIS) and the agricultural innovation system (AIS) concepts. Next, the paper reviews the definition of ‘innovation’ and proposes that agricultural innovation can occur at four different but interlinked domains.
LenCD has prepared a joint statement on results and capacity development (presented in this publication), which stresses that meaningful, sustainable results are premised on proper investments in capacity development and that these results materialize at different levels and at different times, along countries’ development trajectory. To provide evidence in support of this statement, LenCD launched a call for submission of stories.
This paper looks at brokerage functions in a project on building innovation capacity through improved networking. Innovation capacity influences how actors respond to changes in their environments. In such dynamic environments well connected sets of actors are at an advantage in that they can combine skills to address the emerging opportunities and challenges. However, policy and cultural barriers especially in African innovation systems raise the transaction costs of networking leading to weak connectivity among actors thus poor innovation capacity.
Successful cases of innovation invariably demonstrate a range of partnerships, alliances and network-like arrangements that connect together knowledge users, knowledge producers and others involved in enabling innovation in the market, policy and civil society arenas. With this comes the realisation that public agricultural research needs to strengthen links to a wider set of players from the private and civil society sectors and, of course, farmers themselves. Public agricultural extension services have traditionally played the role of linking farmers to technology.
In this paper, findings suggest that the uptake of social media is still in an early, exploratory phase associated with modest opportunities and relevant limitations of Web 2.0 mediated multi-stakeholder collaboration. Notably, there are gaps in giving and receiving feedback which are intrinsic to dyadic communication as well as innovation processes.