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.
Agrifood systems generate significant benefits to society, including the food that nourishes us and jobs and livelihoods for over a billion people. However, their negative impacts due to unsustainable business-as-usual activities and practices are contributing to climate change, natural resource degradation and the unaffordability of healthy diets.
Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) and short organic supply chains have emerged as promising solutions for smallholder farmers to provide organic produce to nearby consumers. PGS is an institutional innovation that builds trust among producers, traders and consumers through a low-cost transparent and participatory certification mechanism. They have particularly gained a foothold among smallholder farmers in middle- income countries, where third-party certification costs are often unaffordable.
In rural areas of developing countries, more than 70% of the population still depends on agriculture. However, economic crises, unscientific land allocation and climate change issues have hindered attempted gains in agricultural productivity and related rural development outcomes. Technology-driven breakthrough has usually pushed agriculture to the brink of another development that can affect not only plant diversity and yield, but also climatological and socio-economic outcomes.
L’approche Champs-Écoles Producteurs (CEP) est introduite au Ghana en 1996, au Niger en 1999 et au Sénégal en 2000 via le projet « Gestion intégrée de la Production et des Déprédateurs (GIPD) » soutenu par la FAO.
The global impacts of the climate crisis are becoming ever clearer, and natural resources and ecosystems are being depleted. Despite some progress, hunger and poverty persist, and inequalities are deepening. The world is realizing that unsustainable high external inputs and resource-intensive industrialized systems pose a real danger of biodiversity loss, increased greenhouse gas emissions, shortages of healthy food, and the impoverishment of dispossessed peasants around the world.
In the rapidly changing context of agri-food systems, extension and advisory services (EAS) are expected to provide new roles and services that go well beyond the traditional production-related technology transfer. Consequently, pluralistic EAS systems with diverse actors have emerged with diverse actors, including private and civil society organisations. These multiple EAS actors must adopt innovative entrepreneurship models if they are to act proactively and respond to the increasing diversity of farmers’ demands while staying independent and sustainable.
This note is a preview on the agricultural innovation systems (AIS) assessment methdology which is being tested in the nine countries of the European Union-funded TAP-AIS DeSIRA project. It presents the rationale, the steps, ethe expected outputs and outcomes.
Assessing or understanding the agriculture innovation system (AIS) is an essential step to better understand the needs, new skills and functions needed by the actors and the system. To accelerate the uptake of innovation and progress towards eradicating poverty, there is an urgent need for well-coordinated, demand-driven, and market-oriented information, knowledge, technologies and services.
Even prior to COVID, there was a considerable push for food system transformation to achieve better nutrition and health as well as environmental and climate change outcomes. Recent years have seen a large number of high visibility and influential publications on food system transformation. Literature is emerging questioning the utility and scope of these analyses, particularly in terms of trade-offs among multiple objectives.