Agricultural innovation systems has become a popular approach to understand and facilitate agricultural in-novation. However, there is often no explicit reflection on the role of agricultural innovation systems in food systems transformation and how they relate to transformative concepts and visions (e.g. agroecology, digital agriculture, Agriculture 4.0, AgTech and FoodTech, vertical agriculture, protein transitions). To support such reflection we elaborate on the importance of a mission-oriented perspective on agricultural innovation systems.
A bilateral project between the Swiss Agency for Cooperation and Development (SDC) and the Nepalese government, which ran from 2016 to 2020 and covered 61 municipalities in provinces 1, 3 (Bagmati) and 6 (Karnali), with technical support from the Swiss NGO Helvetas, aimed to promote a multi-stakeholder approach to agricultural services in Nepal.
The two strategic documents for the future of Europe post 2020 (Green Deal) and agriculture in Europe (From Farm To Fork) recognize the important role of knowledge and innovation systems in accelerating change towards food sustainability. Researchers and advisors, together with the other actors of the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System, have the mandate to cooperate more closely to support all on this transition path. This includes stronger and more structured networking, increased information sharing and using digital tools to this effect.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has developed a web-based Rift Valley fever (RVF) Early Warning Decision Support Tool (RVF DST), which integrates near real-time RVF risk maps with geospatial data, historical and current RVF disease events from EMPRES Global Animal Disease Information System (EMPRES-i) and expert knowledge on RVF eco-epidemiology.
Evaluation provides effective feedback for development plans and programs. In this respect, it is of utmost importance to ensure that the outputs of agricultural extension and education projects are compatible with the ones expected. Therefore, the main purpose of this study was to evaluate agricultural extension model sites approach from actors’ perspectives and to analyze their gaps via the context, input, process, and product (CIPP) evaluation model.
The creation of commercialization opportunities for smallholder farmers has taken primacy on the development agenda of many developing countries. Invariably, most of the smallholders are less productive than commercial farmers and continue to lag in commercialization. Apart from the various multifaceted challenges which smallholder farmers face, limited access to extension services stands as the underlying constraint to their sustainability.
Participatory research can improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and scope of research processes, and foster social inclusion, empowerment, and sustainability. Yet despite four decades of agricultural research institutions exploring and developing methods for participatory research, it has never become mainstream in the agricultural technology development cycle. Citizen science promises an innovative approach to participation in research, using the unique facilities of new digital technologies, but its potential in agricultural research participation has not been systematically probed.
Providing economic opportunities for youth in agriculture is essential to securing the future of agriculture in Africa, addressing poverty, unemployment, and inequality. However, barriers limit youth participation in agriculture and the broader food system. This scoping review aimed to investigate the opportunities and challenges for youth in participating in agriculture and the food system in Africa. This review conducted a scoping review using the PRISMA guideline. Published studies were retrieved from online databases (Web of Science, Cab Direct, and Science Direct) for 2009 to 2019.
This study provides a model that supports systematic stakeholder inclusion in agricultural technology. Building on the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) literature and attempting to add precision to the conversation around inclusion in technology design and governance, this study develops a framework for determining which stakeholder groups to engage in RRI processes. We developed the model using a specific industry case study: identifying the relevant stakeholders in the Canadian digital agriculture ecosystem.
The paper aims at finding out how significantly stakeholders are consulted and involved by preparers, Ukrainian publicly-listed agricultural companies, while compiling sustainability reporting (SR) and by assurance providers, during assurance processes of SR. The paper’s main research question may be formulated as follows ‘How deeply stakeholders are involved at Ukrainian agricultural companies in the preparation of their sustainability reporting and assurance?’