This paper addresses the question how public-private partnerships (PPPs) function as systemic innovation policy instruments within agricultural innovation systems. Public-private partnerships are a popular government tool to promote innovations. However, the wide ranging nature of PPPs make it difficult to assess their effects beyond the direct impacts they generate for the partners.

Innovation is the process whereby individuals or organizations bring new or existing products, processes or ways of organization into use for the first time in a specific context. Innovation in agriculture cuts across all dimensions of the production cycle along the entire value chain - from crop, forestry, fishery or livestock production to the management of inputs and resources to market access. This book represents the proceedings of the first International Symposium on Agricultural Innovation for Family Farmers which FAO organized at its headquarters in Rome, on 21–23 November 2018.

The aim of this paper is to identify opportunities to strengthen food system policy for nutrition, through an analysis of the policies relevant to the external food environment for fruit and vegetables in India. We conducted interviews based on policy theory with 55 stakeholders from national and state level, from within government, research, private sector and non-government agencies, and from health, agriculture and economic sectors.

Efficient agricultural value chains create competitiveness and accelerate industrialisation. Though they have the ability to advance economic partnership and competition, in most African countries, agricultural value chains remain underdeveloped and underexploited; moreover, they are hardly affected by political instability with direct consequences on society. Regional integration with many spill-over, affects agriculture, while food prices and countries' macroeconomic policies affects food security.

“Business as usual” is no longer an option for a food-secure future. Pastoralism can be an innovative system: a time-tested, undervalued alternative to high-input and resource-intensive farming, and a valuable lesson for the much needed evolution towards ‘farming with nature’, with largely-untapped potential for income growth and employment in marginal areas.

Over the past few decades, some countries in Asia have been more successful than others in addressing poverty and malnutrition. The key question is what policies, strategies, legislation and institutional arrangements have led to a transformed agricultural sector, effectively contributing to poverty alleviation and addressing malnutrition. The great majority of national policymakers within and outside the Asia-Pacific region are keen to understand the causes of agricultural development and transformation in successful countries in Asia.

Food systems are at a crossroads. Profound transformation is needed to address Agenda 2030 and to achieve food security and nutrition (FSN) in its four dimensions of availability, access, utilization and stability, and to face multidimensional and complex challenges, including a growing world population, urbanization and climate change, which drive increased pressure on natural resources, impacting land, water and biodiversity. This need has been illustrated from various perspectives in previous HLPE reports and is now widely recognized.

Science and technology (S&T) are major contributors to food security, poverty reduction, and economic growth, as has been proven in Asia since the early-1970s through the Green Revolution in agriculture. Continuing to secure such gains, however, is becoming an increasingly complex undertaking. More than ever, quantitative data are vital for measuring, monitoring, and benchmarking the performance of agricultural S&T systems, including their inputs and outcomes.

Agricultural biotechnology and, specifically, the development of genetically modified (GM) crops have been controversial for several reasons, including concerns that the technology poses potential negative environmental or health effects, that the technology would lead to the (further) corporatization of agriculture, and that it is simply unethical to manipulate life in the laboratory. GM crops have been part of the agricultural landscape for more than 15 years and have now been adopted on more than 170 million hectares (ha) in both developed countries (48%) and developing countries (52%).