The process of knowledge brokering in the agricultural sector, where it is generally called agricultural extension, has been studied since the 1950s. While agricultural extension initially employed research push models, it gradually moved towards research pull and collaborative research models. The current agricultural innovation systems perspective goes beyond seeing research as the main input to change and innovation, and recognises that innovation emerges from the complex interactions among multiple actors and is about fostering combined technical, social and institutional change.
This article applies a historical analysis of the progressive development and complexity of Malawi’s diary innovation system through phased emphasis on technological, organizational and institutional development to illustrate the centrality of smallholder dairy farmers in the innovation system. A social network analysis is applied to assess the influence of smallholder farmers on other actors. The existence and growth of the diary innovation system in Malawi is founded on the resilience of smallholder dairy farmers to produce milk.
PAEPARD supports/facilitates three aflatoxin-related research consortia: (a) Stemming aflatoxin pre- and post-harvest waste in the groundnut value chain in Malawi and Zambia; (b) Developing strategies to reduce fungal toxins contamination for improved food sufficiency, nutrition and incomes along the maize value chain in the arid and semi-arid lands of Eastern Kenya; and (c) Developing feed management protocols for dairy farmers in high rainfall areas in Kenya.
PAEPARD appuie et assiste trois consortiums de recherche liés à l’aflatoxine dans leur travail destiné à : (a) éradiquer les déchets de l’aflatoxine avant et après les récoltes dans la filière arachide au Malawi et en Zambie ; (b) développer des stratégies visant à réduire la contamination par des toxines fongiques pour améliorer l’approvisionnement alimentaire, la nutrition et les revenus le long de la filière maïs dans les zones arides et semi-arides de l’est du Kenya ; et (c) développer des protocoles de gestion des aliments du bétail pour les producteurs laitiers dans les zones à forte
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.
TAP and its partners carried out regional surveys in Asia, Africa and Central America to assess priorities, capacities and needs in national agricultural innovation systems. This document provides a Regional synthesis report on capacity needs assessment for agricultural innovation in Africa. FARA was selected as Recipient Organization by FAO to facilitate TAP implementation in Africa. This is mainly due to its position as the umbrella organization bringing together and forming coalitions of major regional stakeholders in agricultural research and development.
The main purpose of this paper is to take stock of some of the most significant results emanating from The International Development Research Centre (IDRC)‐supported programmes, in recent years in the area of organizational capacity development, and feeding into the consultation process for the formulation of IDRC`s next Corporate Strategy Program Framework (CSPF) for the 2010‐2015 period.
Many capacity development (CD) programs and processes aim at long‐term sustainable change, which depends on seeing many smaller changes in at times almost invisible fields (rules, incentives, behaviours, power, coordination etc.). Yet, most evaluation processes of CD tend to focus on short‐term outputs focused on clearly visible changes.
In this article is presented an emergent capacity development approach that the authors have developed through participatory action research in Peru and Ecuador, which they call ‘systemic theories of change’ (STOC), for organisational capacity development. They argue that capacity development should be understood as systemic learning. The STOC approach promotes reflection about how we as individuals, organisations, and broader social groups and societal configurations, understand how change occurs.
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.