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.
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 lessons and recommendations outlined in this paper were captured at a PAEPARD Capitalization Workshop with all partners, held in Cotonou, Benin, on 2-6 October 2017. The workshop was key to the overall evaluation of PAEPARD II, as it encouraged participants to analyse and reflect on their experiences of the AfricanEuropean MSP for ARD processes facilitated by PAEPARD over the last 7 years.
Les leçons et les recommandations mises en avant dans cette publication sont issues d’un atelier de capitalisation de PAEPARD qui a réuni tous les partenaires à Cotonou, au Bénin, du 2 au 6 octobre 2017. Cet atelier a joué un rôle essentiel dans l’évaluation globale de PAEPARD, car il a encouragé les participants à analyser leurs expériences relatives aux PMA afro-européens pour les processus de RAD facilités par PAEPARD durant ces sept dernières années. Lors des discussions, les partenaires ont réfléchi à l’avenir des activités de PAEPARD et à la pérennité de ses réalisations.
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.
This paper compares lessons learned from nine studies that explored institutional determinants of innovation towards sustainable intensification of West African agriculture. The studies investigated issues relating to crop, animal, and resources management in Benin, Ghana, and Mali.The studies showed that political ambitions to foster institutional change were often high (restoring the Beninese cotton sector and protecting Ghanaian farmers against fluctuating cocoa prices) and that the institutional change achieved was often remarkable.
Based on international literature, preliminary experiences in a three-country West African research programme, and on the disappointing impact of agricultural research on African farm innovation, the current paper argues that institutional change demands rethinking the pathways to innovation so as to acknowledge the role of rules, distribution of power and wealth, interaction and positions. The time is opportune: climate change, food insecurity, high food prices and concomitant riots are turning national food production into a political issue also for African leaders.