Les systèmes d’innovation (SI) ont inspiré de nombreuses publications, notamment dans les pays industrialisés et, plus récemment, dans le monde en développement. Toutefois, à quelques exceptions près, la littérature dédiée aux SI n’explique pas de manière appropriée comment utiliser l’approche systémique pour améliorer l’innovation ou comment initier et faciliter les SI. Par ailleurs, si l’innovation elle-même semble avoir été suffisamment étudiée, son intégration dans un système qui, à son tour, opère dans certains contextes institutionnels et politiques, n’a pas été approfondie.
The aim of this document is to produce a state-of-the-art of the academic literature in order to identify theories and concepts available for: a) describing the structure, the dynamics and the functioning of agricultural advisory services; b) understanding how these services are embedded into national Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS), and into various agricultural and rural policies across the European Union (EU) countries; c) providing some conceptual elements to support the methodology for an inventory of agricultural advisory services in EU 27 countries (WP3 of the PR
In an effort to raise incomes and increase resilience of smallholder farmers and their families in Feed the Future1 (FTF) countries, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) funded the Developing Local Extension Capacity (DLEC) project. This project is led by Digital Green in partnership with the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), CARE International (CARE) and multiple resource partners.
This research project aims to build ACP capacity to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of the local science, technology and innovation system in the agricultural sector.
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.
There is increasing policy, practice and academic interest in “inclusive innovation”. In simple terms, this is the means by which new goods and services are developed for and/or by those who have been excluded from the development mainstream; particularly the billions living on lowest incomes. However, there are many competing perspectives on inclusive innovation, which this paper resolves into an integrated ‘ladder’ model of different levels of inclusive innovation.
This note offers a conceptual framework for dealing with 1) institutional and capacity assessment; and 2) capacity development issues, mainly in the public sector areas. This framework will be particularly useful in the in the preparation of support to sector programmes and budget support exercises.
This Working Paper on Capacity Building is one of a series of 10 papers published alongside DFID's Research Strategy 2008-2013. It presents the case for DFID-funded research on Capacity Building - drawing on the responses given during a global consultation that DFID convened in 2007 about its future research.
The purpose of this paper is to map some elements that can contribute to an IFAD strategy to stimulate and support pro-poor innovations. It is an initial or exploratory document that hopefully will add to an ongoing and necessary debate, and is not intended as a final position paper. The document is organized as follows.
These notes summarise reflections on local innovation and participatory innovation development that took place within the PROLINNOVA International Support Team (IST), based on observations and discussions with network partners during advisory visits and international workshops.