Multi-stakeholder partnerships network which is typified by the FARA-led Integrated Agriculture Research for Development (IAR4D) of the SSA-Challenge Program is an innovation platform (IP) composed of stakeholders bound together by their individual interests in a shared commodity or outcome. The result from such innovation platforms is largely influenced by the strength of the network. In this paper, similarities within and across platforms are assessed using the simple matching procedure. Results indicate consistency in conduct of Innovation Platform activities.
In order to facilitate improved returns to research and development in African agriculture, the innovation systems approach which engenders the involvement of multiple stakeholders in its innovation pathway, has been proposed. Despite the potential of this approach, the understanding of its implementation and particularly of the process of setting up its multi-stakeholder platform is still largely lacking. Yet, this platform is critical to the success and sustainability of the operations of the platform.
This paper examines how the different institutional innovations arising from various permutations of linkages and interactions of ARD organizations (national, international advanced agricultural research centres and universities) influenced the different outcomes in addressing identified ARD problems.
In sub-Saharan Africa, there is increasing interest for the adaptation and use of the innovation systems approach to advance learning and development in the Agricultural Research and Development (ARD) sector. This crave is constrained by unavailability of a proven blue print that describe the paradigm shift from the linear approach and how such could function under different socio-economic, cultural and political climate.
Little is known about effective ways to operationalize agricultural innovation processes. The authors of this article use the MasAgro program in Mexico (which aims to increase maize and wheat productivity, profitability and sustainability), and the experiences of middle level ‘hub managers’, to understand how innovation processes occur in heterogeneous and changing contexts. Their research shows how a program, that initially had a relatively narrow technology focus, evolved towards an innovation system approach.
This article addresses the impact of Integrated Agricultural Research for Development (IAR4D) on food security among smallholder farmers in three countries of southern Africa (Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Malawi). Southern Africa has suffered continued hunger despite a myriad of technological interventions that have been introduced in agriculture to address issues of food security, as well as poverty alleviation.
The failure of the linear and non-participatory Agricultural Research and Development approaches to increase food security among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa has prompted researchers to introduce an Integrated Agricultural Research for Development (IAR4D) concept. The IAR4D concept uses Innovation Platforms (IPs) to embed agricultural research and development organizations in a network to undertake multidisciplinary and participatory research.
This paper sets out to determine the impact of Integrated Agricultural Research for Development in three selected countries of Southern Africa. Agricultural productivity in Southern Africa faces several challenges, of which poor soil fertility strikes out as the priority problem inhibiting increased productivity in farmers’ fields. While several soil fertility management technologies are being promoted in the region, their uptake by smallholder farmers remains very low.
This article reports on the long-term involvement of research agronomists in a design process of agricultural systems in a water catchment area. While agriculture is facing increasing challenges to meet current societal expectations, several studies in agronomy have focused on the design processes that allow farmers to change their agricultural systems.
Although many agronomic researchers currently focus on designing and developing decision support systems, they rarely discuss the methodological implications of such work. In this paper, with the examples of two decision support systems, we propose methodological elements for conducting the participatory design of such tools. The authors proposition aims at building dialogue between designers and users but also between humans, tools and work situations.