Des changements dans les agendas des politiques publiques des Comités Nationaux de l’Agriculture Familiale des Philippines, du Honduras, du Burkina Faso et du Sénégal seront soutenus techniquement et économiquement. La création d’un nouveau Comité au Tchad sera également appuyée.
En matière de semences, on oppose souvent un modèle orienté vers le business à un modèle orienté vers l’agriculture paysanne. Ces deux modèles ont des implications socio-économiques différentes, aussi bien en termes d’emplois, que d’autonomie des agriculteurs ou de biodiversité. Les agricultures paysannes des pays du Sud ont-elles le poids et l’influence politique nécessaires pour faire prévaloir leurs modèles semenciers ? C’est la question que nous explorons dans ce dossier.
Cette étude a été menée dans le cadre du projet PAEPARD ou Plateforme pour un partenariat Afrique-Europe dans le domaine de la recherche agricole pour le développement, projet financé à 80% par la Commission européenne avec pour objectif de consolider la collaboration entre l’Afrique et l’Europe dans le domaine de la Recherche Agricole pour le Développement.
Presentation by David Neven, Senior Economist at FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), for the Global Forum for innovations in agriculture (Abu Dhabi, 20-21 March 2017), an event to present solutions and inspire debate across all types of food production.
This collection of posters from the TAP-AIS project illustrates key achievements of the project towards strengthening national agricultural innovation systems (AIS) in Africa (Burkina Faso, Eritrea, Malawi, Rwanda, Senegal), Latin America (Colombia), Asia and the Pacific (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Pakistan). For each of these nine countries, and for their respective regions, the posters provide: i) thematic focus and context; ii) constraints in the AIS; iii) capacity development interventions; iv) outcomes; v) the way forward.
This paper examines different practical methods for stakeholders to analyse power dynamics in multi-stakeholders processes (MSPs), taking into account the ambiguous and uncertain nature of complex adaptive systems. It reflects on an action learning programme which focused on 12 cases in Africa and Asia put forward by 6 Dutch development non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
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 paper briefly reviews three conceptual frameworks: namely, the national agricultural research system (NARS), the agricultural knowledge and information system (AKIS) and the agricultural innovation system (AIS) concepts. Next, the paper reviews the definition of ‘innovation’ and proposes that agricultural innovation can occur at four different but interlinked domains.
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.
The Challenge of Capacity Development: Working Towards Good Practice draws on four decades of documented experience provided by both bilateral and multilateral donors, as well as academic specialists, to help policy makers and practitioners think through effective approaches to capacity development and what challenges remain in the drive to boost country capacity. The analysis is underpinned by a conceptual framework which guides practitioners to view capacity development at three interrelated levels: individual, organisational and enabling environment levels.