The Farmer Field School (FFS) approach has been very successful and witnessed a strong expansion in many areas beyond crop production. Notwithstanding this success, the adoption of FFS in national extension often remains problematic and FFS activities have often been implemented in the margin of national institutions with strong reliance on donor funding. The creation of an enabling environment for institutional support is essential for expanding the effort, improving quality, and strengthening impact and continuity of the FFSs.
This paper examines the level of heterogeneity of member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), regarding their potential and performance as Agricultural Sectoral Innovation Systems (ASIS). The main objective is the classification of the ASIS in an OECD context; based on a series of indicators that correspond to their productivity, competitiveness, social, economic and institutional conditions, as well as their capacities and innovation results.
In theory, under the federal structure agricultural extension services can serve communities better as it aims to be client responsive and accountable to its consumers at the village level. However, poor understanding of federalism that has only recently emerged from the persisting centralized and feudal conceptions, limited practices of democratic norms and values primarily due to the lack of understanding of local governance, and limited commitment of political actors and policy makers to federalism, may derail the good intentions behind federalism.
This paper addresses four questions: · What lessons can be drawn from the "rise and decline" of NARS in Africa? · What can African research managers learn from some of the successful reforms of NARS in Asia and Latin America over the past 10 to 15 years? · What are the major challenges facing the NARS in the ASARECA region in the coming 10-20 years? · What are the critical reforms and the incentives needed to develop pluralistic, accountable, productive and financially self-sustaining NARS in AFRICA?
This paper contends that the exclusion of millions of poor from agricultural development gains is inexorably linked to the innovation system features that have evolved over time. An oft repeated lament of the Government of India about the inadequacy of reforms in agricultural research and extension, is used to explore the structure and institutions of agricultural innovation. Three main components of the agricultural innovation system, are the agricultural research and extension actors, the farming communities, and policy making agencies.
Many experts believe that low-cost mitigation opportunities in agriculture are abundant and comparable in scale to those found in the energy sector. They are mostly located in developing countries and have to do with how land is used. By investing in projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), countries can tap these opportunities to meet their own Kyoto Protocol obligations. The CDM has been successful in financing some types of agricultural projects, including projects that capture methane or use agricultural by-products as an energy source.
Innovation learning platforms have their roots in the agricultural innovation systems (AIS) approach. AIS emphasizes a systems view of agricultural innovations and conceptualizes an innovation system as all individuals and organizations that keep on interacting in producing and using knowledge and the institutional context of knowledge sharing and learning. Research creates knowledge and technology; but innovation process goes further to include putting that knowledge into use.
This report explores the role of rural networks in enhancing innovation processes, questioning the features of the agricultural/rural networks could enhance farmers’ ability to co-innovate in cooperation with other actors. The prospect of this investigation is also to provide interesting and significant experiences that constitute examples for the ‘European Innovation Partnership’ by increasing farmers’ capacities to create, test, implement and evaluate innovations in cooperation with other rural actors.
This publication represents a synthesis of assessments of national agricultural innovation systems in countries of Central Asia, South Caucasus and Turkey. The first chapter gives an introduction of the project “Capacity Development for Analysis and Strengthening of Agricultural Innovation Systems in Central Asia and Turkey”, out of which the current publication reports about one of the project outputs achieved.
This paper analyzes how the Papa Andina Partnership Program, based at the International Potato Center, functions as an innovation broker in the Andean potato sector. As a regional initiative, Papa Andina operates as a second-level innovation broker, backstopping national partners who facilitate local innovation processes in their respective countries. Papa Andina works to strengthen local innovation capacity and to foster innovations in innovation the development of more effective ways of bringing stakeholders together to produce innovations that benefit small-scale farmers.