This paper addresses how co-producing knowledge can assist local farmers in reshaping their territories into sustainable farming systems. We describe the emergence and consolidation of an agroforestry system in an Eastern Amazon forest frontier, unpacking the co-production of a new farming system over recent decades. Instead of assuming pre-defined categories (e.g., traditional/technical, local/external), the analysis focuses on interactions among knowledge holders and how multiple knowledge sources are intercalated.
These initiatives generated transformative and lasting results and contributed to the strengthening of local public policies and economic growth. Using very few resources and focusing on agroecological and inclusive production methods, these women have become role models in their communities and beyond. Empowered women can participate more actively in their communities and foster inclusive local policies that will ultimately drive more sustainable and just rural development.
Food is a human right. Yet hundreds of millions are still going to bed hungry. FAO´s Right to Food Guidelines recommend how to take action, so that everyone has access to sufficient, safe, nutritious and affordable food every day. The Guidelines are a powerful policy tool to end hunger and malnutrition in all its forms. Many countries are taking steps in line with these guidelines. Only when everyone enjoys the human right to adequate food, will we be on track to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.
Brazil has transformed from being a net food importer, to one of the largest agricultural exporters in the world. The country is now one of the top global funders of agricultural innovation, with a special emphasis on funding R&D for sustainable agriculture. While food insecurity and environmental challenges exist in many parts of Brazil, social programs and funding in innovation have helped those in need.
The concept of an innovation system is used to understand how innovation contributes to economic growth. However, innovation systems do not evolve evenly in different parts of the world. This paper contributes to the ongoing debate on the emergence of innovation systems in the context of developing countries. It uses the Rwandan case, where agriculture is a dominant socio-economic sector with high innovation potential. It explores how stakeholder interactions and policies contribute to the emergence of an agriculture innovation system in Rwanda.
Agriculture is crucial for the livelihood of millions of people worldwide and is one of the main drivers of deforestation, biodiversity loss and resource degradation. The contribution of agriculture to these environmental problems has been exacerbated by subsidies, which constitute the dominant public policy to support farmers. At the same time, other economic instruments introducing more sustainable land-use practices and incentivizing better environmental and social outcomes are already being applied worldwide.
The study was designed to answer the following three key questions:
(1) What types of investment instruments have been tested to support innovation in agri-food systems in the Global South, and how can these be categorized into a working typology?
(2) What is the evidence on how well different instruments have supported SAI's multiple objectives (e.g. social equality and environmental) at scale and what contextual and design factors affect their success or failure in achieving these objectives (e.g. type of value chain, who participates)?
What are the patterns of funding in agricultural innovation for the Global South1 ? Who are the key funders in this innovation and who are the key recipients? How doesthis funding split between various topics and value chains? What proportion of these funds support Sustainable Agricultural Intensification (SAI)? And how is SAI innovation funding split across different parts of the agriculture sector funding and innovation canvas?
Increasing investment and spending in agricultural innovation is not enough to meet Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets of ending poverty and hunger because the effectiveness of investments in low- and middle-income (LMI) countries is affected by the low quality of infrastructure and services provided, and by different norms and practices that create a considerable gap between financing known technical solutions and achieving the outcomes called for in the SDGs.