The 2012 RUFORUM Biennial Conference is the third in the series. The main objective of the Biennial conferences is to provide a platform for agricultural research for development stakeholders in Africa and beyond to actively exchange findings and experiences, while at the same time learning lessons towards improving performance of the agricultural sector and ultimately people’s livelihoods. The biennial conference is RUFORUM’s most comprehensive meeting for the diversity of stakeholders in agriculture.
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) partnered with the Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions (APAARI) in 2011 to conduct a series of policy dialogues on the prioritization of demand-driven agricultural research for development in South Asia. Dialogues were conducted with a wide range of stakeholders in Bangladesh, India, and Nepal in mid-2012 and this report captures feedback from those dialogues.
This publication, consisting of several modules, includes participatory research approaches for examining a wide range of questions regarding if and how farming practices are being modified to deal with a changing environment, and the constraints and opportunities these changes pose for both men and women.
This Module is the third in a series of four that address capacity development competencies in FAO. It is intended to enhance FAO’s practices in designing, developing, delivering and evaluating its activities in support of learning in Member Countries, while ensuring that learning leads to sustainable capacity development.
This study, supported by the Challenge Program Water and Food (CPWF-Project 35), demonstrates the case of multiple-use of water through seasonal aquaculture interventions for improved rice–fish production systems in the Bangladesh floodplains. The project focused on community-based fish culture initiatives, increasingly adopted in the agro-ecological zones of the major floodplains of the Padma, Testa, and Brahmaputra basin.
Innovation is an important challenge for European agriculture, but little is known about the performance of the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS). This report contributes towards this knowledge, as it reports on experiences from different countries and regions. The systems are very different between countries, regions and sectors.
The paper aims to identify barriers to the development of Learning and Innovation Networks for sustainable agriculture (LINSA). In such networks, social learning processes take place, and knowledge about sustainable agriculture is co-produced by connecting between the different frames and social worlds of the stakeholders with the help of boundary objects. Studying such processes at the interface between different knowledge spheres of research, policy and practice requires a specific methodology.
This book contains a collection of papers that discuss the experience of an Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D) capacity building program in Papua New Guinea (PNG). The program was the AusAID-funded Agricultural Research and Development Support Facility (ARDSF), which ran for fi ve years from 2007 to 2012, and which sought to improve the delivery of services by agricultural research organisations to smallholder farmers.
The purpose of this piece of work is to investigate, through a literature review, the role of intermediaries in agricultural extension and rural development. In the first place, a general view of the roles of intermediaries, as depicted in literature, is presented. Then, one of the main types of intermediaries, facilitators is outlined based on a comprehensive review of the literature, particularly in the healthcare sector.
This set of guidance notes is designed to support practitioners and evaluators in conducting retrospective evaluations of a capacity development intervention or portfolio to assess and document results. Users will enhance their understanding of the capacity development process, of what works and what does not work in promoting change and to inform future programs. The standard M&E approach for assessing capacity development results has not been sufficient.