This work has largely focused on the developed world, yet the majority of people and future economic growth lies in the developing world. Further, most research examines micro data on consumers or firms, limiting what is known regarding the role of macro factors on diffusion, such as social systems. Addressing these limitations, this research provides the first high-level insights into how green building adoption is occurring in developing countries.
Economic development and the successful transformation ofagriculture have been at the core of impressive change in countriessuch as China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina. This transformation has relied on substantial and effective investment inagriculture, and, in particular, building capacity in all aspects of agricultural change – from technology development and transfer through infrastructural development and the processing of agricultural commodities into consumer products.
The main challenge in Indonesia to an innovation-led approach to increasing farm productivity and farmers’ incomes is not due to a lack of good ideas by researchers but rather the lack of effective mechanisms making these ideas available and accessible to farmers.
Enhancing the diversity of agricultural production systems is increasingly recognized as a potential
means to sustainably provide diversified food for rural communities in developing countries, hence
ensuring their nutritional security. However, empirical evidences connecting farm production
diversity and farm-households’ dietary diversity are scarce. Using comprehensive datasets of
market-oriented smallholder farm households from Indonesia and Kenya, and subsistence farmers
KIT and the Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA) published this joint publication in which farmers were put in the driver’s seat. Within the programme ‘farmer empowerment for innovation in smallholder agriculture’ (FEISA) farmers were provided tools and skills to enhance collaboration with private enterprises, as well as service providers, in multi stakeholder ‘innovation triangles’ within value chains for the benefit of smallholder farmers.
This review studied a selection of projects from the Research Into Use (RIU) Africa portfolio: the Nyagatare maize platform in Rwanda; the cowpea platform in Kano state, Nigeria; the pork platform in Malawi, the Farm Input Promotions (FIPS) Best Bet in Kenya, and the Armyworm Best Bet in Kenya and Tanzania. For each of the selected projects, assessments were made on how it changed the capacity to innovate, the household level poverty impact, whether the intervention off ered value for money, and what were the main lessons learned.
This review seeks to assess the usefulness of innovation systems approaches in the context of the Integrated Agricultural Research for Development (IAR4D) in guiding research agendas, generating knowledge and use in improving food security and nutrition, reducing poverty and generating cash incomes for resource-poor farmers. The report draws on a range of case studies across sub-Saharan Africa to compare and contrast the reasons for success from which lessons can be learned.
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-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.
The Guidance Note on Operationalization provides a brief recap of the conceptual underpinnings and principles of the TAP Common Framework as well as a more detailed guide to operationalization of the proposed dual pathways approach. It offers also a strategy for monitoring and evaluation as well as a toolbox of select tools that may be useful at the different stages of the CD for AIS cycle.