In-depth analysis of the role and capacity development needs of farmers organization in innovation processes, using the evidence from a number of case studies from contemporary SSA agriculture. Experiences indicate that Farmers’organizations (FOs) can play an important role in sharing knowledge-for-innovation by initiating multi-actor platforms for interactive learning and by implementing joint activity programmes (including use of the media) with extension services on a cost-sharing basis.
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.
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.
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.
This paper identifies market failures that limit agricultural R&D for Africa and other resource-poor environments, and proposes a way to complement existing institutions with cash prizes for the dissemination of successful new technologies adopted by low-income farmers. The proposed prize institution would use agronomic experiments and farm surveys to document the value of innovations after their initial diffusion, and offer payments in proportion to estimated social benefits in target regions.
Uganda pioneered the use of budget support operations known as Poverty Reduction Support Credits (PRSCs) in the World Bank. PRSCs were designed to channel programmatic lending to support policy and institutional reforms in support of a country's Poverty Reduction Strategy, usually presented in the form of a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). In the case of Uganda the PRSCs were designed as a series of annual credits supporting a three year rolling program of reforms, based on Uganda's version of a PRSC, which is known as the Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) .
The livelihoods of mountain farmers are often constrained by poor access to markets and limited entrepreneurial skills for adding value to produce. Research and development organizations have now recognized that improving market access and enhancing the ability of resource-poor mountain farmers to diversify their links with markets are among the most pressing challenges in mountain agriculture.
The International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) implements participatory monitoring and evaluation (PM&E) systems as a means of strengthening learning, self-reflection and facilitating institutional learning and change (ILAC) processes within Research and Development (R&D) institutions and local communities in Africa.
La rencontre des chercheurs qui s’interrogent sur l’efficacité de leurs interventions pour accompagner les acteurs dans les processus de changement constitue une occasion pour s’interroger sur les méthodes de recherche à développer lors de travaux réalisés avec les acteurs : recherche participative, « recherche-action », recherche intervention... L’auteur propose de présenter la démarche de recherche-action comme nouvelle.