Agricultural transformation and development are critical to the livelihoods of more than a billion small-scale farmers and other rural people in developing countries. Extension and advisory services play an important role in such transformation and can assist farmers with advice and information, brokering and facilitating innovations and relationships, and dealing with risks and disasters.
Women often have less access to agricultural information than men, constraining their participation in decision-making on crops, technologies, and practices. In the design of agricultural extension programs, women may be viewed as insignificant actors in agricultural production. Moreover, even if their role is recognized, valuable information on production does not flow freely within the household from men to women.
This study examines interventions in two agricultural development projects in Ghana which aimed to build competitiveness of selected value chains to generate growth and reduce poverty – the Northern Rural Growth Project, implemented between 2009 and 2016, and the Market Oriented Agriculture Programme, which began in 2004 and is still in place.
Agrifood systems are powerful levers for improving livelihoods. They must also address an array of systemic challenges, including satisfying growing global food demand, improving diets, limiting greenhouse gas emissions, adapting to a warming climate, and sustaining the environment. Technology and innovation play a central role in meeting these challenges. This brief offers two policy recommendations to support the contribution of innovation. First, G20 countries should increase political and financial support to agrifood systems research in developing countries.
Also known as CD4AIS. This interactive guidebook brings together tools and resources to help practitioners design and implement capacity development activities with an innovation systems approach in mind. The guidance provided here is not prescriptive.
Agricultural mechanization in developing countries has taken at least two contested innovation pathways—the “incumbent trajectory” that promotes industrial agriculture, and an “alternative pathway” that supports small-scale mechanization for sustainable development of hillside farming systems.
The EU rural development policy has addressed challenges related to climate change in agriculture by introducing public voluntary schemes, which financially support the adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices. Several factors, most of which are non-financial ones, drive adoption and continuation of these schemes by farmers. Despite the importance of these factors, only a few studies explore their role in the European context. This paper contributes to filling this gap from a twofold perspective.
La investigación tuvo como objetivo generar un marco conceptual sobre las temáticas más relevantes y actualizadas de la innovación en la agroindustria. La metodología se fundamentó en una búsqueda sistemática de información que inicialmente permitiera conformar un marco conceptual sobre la innovaciónen agroindustria, hasta llegar a identificar los componentes, tendencias y distintas acciones en el sector agroindustrial.
This paper addresses the under-researched issue of stakeholder identification and engagement in problem structuring interventions. A concise framework to aid critical reflection in the design and reporting of stakeholder identification and engagement is proposed. This is grounded in a critical-systemic epistemology, and is informed by social identity theory. We illustrate the utility of the framework with an example of a problem structuring workshop, which was part of a green innovation project on the development of a technology for the recovery of rare metals from steel slag.
Expertise in research integration and implementation is an essential but often overlooked component of tackling complex societal and environmental problems. We focus on expertise relevant to any complex problem, especially contributory expertise, divided into ‘knowing-that’ and ‘knowing-how.’ We also deal with interactional expertise and the fact that much expertise is tacit. We explore three questions.