This report is concerned with the ‘who?’ ‘what?’ and ‘how?’ of pro-poor extension. It builds on the analytical framework proposed in the Inception Report of the same study (Christoplos, Farrington and Kidd, 2001), taking it forward by fleshing out the analysis with empirical information gathered from several countries during the course of the study (from primary data in Bolivia, Colombia, Nicaragua, Uganda and Vietnam, and from secondary sources in a range of other countries, including India), and drawing conclusions on the scope for action by governments and donors in a range of contexts.
This booklet is the third in the CIAT in Asia Research for Development series. It was based on the experiences of researchers and farmers working with the AusAID-funded Forages for Smallholders Project (FSP) in Southeast Asia from 1995 to 1999. This project was a partnership of smallholder farmers, development workers and researchers who were using participatory approaches to developing forage technologies on farms.
Farmers in Asia like to grow cassava because the crop will tolerate long dry periods and poor soils, and will produce reasonable yields with little inputs. Most farmers realize, however, that cassava production on slopes can cause severe erosion, while production without fertilizer inputs may lead to a decline in soil productivity. Research has shown that cassava yields can be maintained for many years with adequate application of fertilizers, and that there are various ways to reduce erosion.
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.
There are divergent views on what capacity development might mean in relation to agricultural biotechnology. The core of this debate is whether this should involve the development of human capital and research infrastructure, or whether it should encompass a wider range of activities which also include developing the capacity to use knowledge productively. This paper uses the innovation systems concept to shed light on this discussion, arguing that it is innovation capacity rather than science and technology capacity that has to be developed.
Farmers in Asia like to grow cassava because the crop will tolerate long dry periods and poor soils, and will produce reasonable yields with little inputs. Most farmers realize, however, that cassava production on slopes can cause severe erosion, while production without fertilizer inputs may lead to a decline in soil productivity. Research has shown that cassava yields can be maintained for many years with adequate application of fertilizers, and that there are various ways to reduce erosion.
This Economic and Sector Work paper, “Enhancing Agricultural Innovation: How to Go Beyond the Strengthening of Research Systems,” was initiated as a result of the international workshop, “Development of Research Systems to Support the Changing Agricultural Sector,” organized by the Agriculture and Rural Development Department of the World Bank in June 2004 in Washington, DC.
L’objectif de cet article est de décrire et de comprendre les comportements à innover des coopératives agricoles. Il mobilise le cadre théorique de l’économie de l’innovation. Exploitant une enquête postale sur la région Midi-Pyrénées, la typologie des comportements à innover obtenue après analyse statistique permet d’identifier cinq classes d’entreprises coopératives. Du fait de leur importance à l’amont des filières et des territoires, les coopératives apparaissent comme des intermédiaires incontournables pour répercuter les contraintes de l’aval auprès des exploitants agricoles.
Este libro, originalmente un documento de trabajo económico y sectorial del Banco Mundial, se inició como resultado de un taller internacional,“Desarrollo de sistemas de investigación para el apoyo a un cambiante sector agrícola”, que fue organizado por el Departamento de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural del Banco Mundial en junio de 2004 en Washington, DC.
Les partisans de la souveraineté alimentaire veulent développer les agricultures locales, tandis que les avocats de la libéralisation vantent les bienfaits d’un approvisionnement à moindre coût sur les marchés. Les premiers pensent que les Etats doivent définir leur politique agricole pour répondre aux besoins de leurs populations, les seconds préfèrent le concept de « sécurité alimentaire », affirmant qu’il reconnaît aussi à chaque citoyen le droit de se nourrir à sa faim. Le combat pour la souveraineté a du mal à s’imposer dans l’arène politique.