Recently, Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKISs) have gained considerable attention in scientific and political forums in the European Union (EU). AKIS is considered a key concept in identifying, analysing and assessing the various actors in the agricultural sector as well as their communication and interaction for innovation processes. Using qualitative expert interviews and organizational mapping, the features of national AKISs were investigated in selected EU member states (Belgium, France, Ireland, Germany, Portugal and the UK).
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.
Depuis plusieurs décennies, les pays de l’Afrique de l’Ouest se sont investis dans le développement et la diffusion des innovations agricoles dans le but d’accroître la productivité agricole et la production vivrière en particulier. Plusieurs mécanismes et approches ont été développés à cet effet en vue d’une utilisation efficace de ces innovations agricoles par les producteurs.
Ce document examine les approches suivies actuellement en ce qui concerne le renforcement des capacités commerciales dans les pays africains. Ce but est de:
Identifier des mécanismes permettant de promouvoir un processus de formulation de la politique commerciale de type participatif et de l’intégrer dans les stratégies nationales de développement et de lutte contre la pauvret.
Etudier le rôle que pourraient jouer les donneurs en facilitant et en soutenant le processus d’élaboration de la politique commerciale.
Le présent document a reconnu l’existence d’un consensus international croissant au sujet de l’importance de l’objectif de renforcement des capacités et de la façon dont il a des chances d’être réalisé. L’accent a été mis sur la reconnaissance du fait que le renforcement des capacités est un processus endogène, sur l’importance de l’appropriation des politiques nationales qui en résulte, et sur la nécessité pour les donneurs de se limiter à encourager et à soutenir les efforts du pays.
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.