The “ONE WORLD – No Hunger” Initiative (SEWOH) by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) is part of the G7 goal to free 500 million people from hunger and malnourishment by 2030. SEWOH intends to contribute significantly to reducing poverty and hunger in developing countries in general and Cameroon in particular. The Cameroonian project is part of the framework of the global project – “Green Innovation Centres for the Agriculture and Food Sector” (ProCISA).
The core idea of the article is the existence of complicated array of deterrent factors that influences innovation activity of agriculture organizations, and subjective, psychological factors among those factors as well. The main goal of this work is to assess the top management and proprietors’ of AIC enterprises readiness to implement the innovations. As a research’ working hypothesis used the decisive role of human factor in answering the question whether to innovate or not.
According to the literature on regime tran-sition, niches are sources of innovation that may lead to the transformation of the dominant regime, if pro-cesses at other level of the system –the landscape and the mainstream regime -are supportive. A focus on actors involved in the transition process and the analysis of their specific role in knowledge networks can help assessing the robustness of a specific niche and its growth potential. Knowledge systems, and in particular the dynamics of local and expert knowledge, have in fact a key role in innovation mod-els.
This flyer provides an overview of the TAP Common Framework on Capacity Development (CD) for Agriculture Innovation System (AIS). The objective of the Common Framework is to consolidate the different approaches to CD for AIS, and make interventions more coherent and effective. Approved by TAP Partners in January 2016, the Common Framework is now being validated in 8 pilot countries in Africa, Asia and Central America.
This paper discusses innovation in low and middle-income countries, focusing on the role it has played in local and national responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the lessons from this effort for how innovation might be harnessed to address wider development and humanitarian challenges by mobilising resources, improving processes, catalysing collaboration and encouraging creative and contextually grounded approaches. The paper also examines how international development and humanitarian organisations can improve their support for local and national innovation efforts.
Addressing 21st century development challenges requires investments in innovation, including the use of new approaches and technologies. Currently, many development organisations prioritise investments in isolated innovation pilots that leverage a specific approach or technology rather than pursuing a strategic approach to expand the organisation's toolbox with innovations that have proven their comparative advantage over what is currently used.
For most development organisations and funders, innovation remains a sprawling collection of activities, often energetic, but largely uncoordinated. To a dregree, this has also been the case for Iceland's development co-operation. Iceland, a comparatively small but energetic player in the international development co-operation system, provided the equivalent of 0.28% (roughly 67 million Euro) of it 2021 gross national income towards Official Development Assistance.
Mission-Oriented Innovation Policies (MOIPs) are one approach that can advance the required transformations. As our colleague Philippe Larrue noted in a 2021 paper, MOIPs are "a co-ordinated package of policy and regulatory measures tailored specifically to mobilise science, technology and innovation in order to address well-defined objectives related to a societal challenge, in a defined timeframe".
The OECD Mission Action Lab critically examines the practice of missions and mission-oriented policies as well as their suitability to different problem contexts. Addressing complex challenges comes first, methods come second. The Lab is, thus, not promoting "missions" as the one and only instrument to address complex problems or societal transitions. Rather, we aim to understand when and how mission as an approach to public policies is useful and, sometimes more importantly, when it is not.