This presentation argues the need of green growth in agriculture, analyzes features of the innovation systems and ends with some policies practices. The presentation has been prepared for "Innovation and Modernising the Rural Economy", OECD’s 8th Rural Development Policy Conference, 3-5 October 2012 (Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation).
This document (section F2.2. of the report on The state of foresight in food and agriculture and the roads toward improvement) presents one of the GCARD2 F2 session on “Foresight Guiding Research and Innovation” and provides information that was relevant for the discussions during the session, such as on Farming Patterns of the Future, Future land use changes, Linking future production and consumption.
Starting with background information, the report presents a summary of the plenary presentations of the workshop, which includes a brief on the post-conflict and protracted crisis environment in the 15 participating countries (Rwanda, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Congo Brazzaville, Sierra Leone, Burundi, Ethiopia, Uganda, Central African Republic, Chad, Guinea Bissau, Guinea Conakry, Liberia, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan). Some countries like Afghanistan qualified all in one as conflict, post-conflict and protracted crisis country.
This report describes issues presented and discussed at a workshop held in Rwanda from 6 - 8 September 2012, focused on strengthening capacity in agricultural innovation in post-conflict and protracted crisis (2PC) countries. It was the first workshop of its kind that attempted to bring participants from 2PC countries around the globe to rally around a common cause.
This brief on the session of "Partnerships for livelihood impacts" which was held during the the GCARD Second Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (Punta Del Este, Uruguay, 29 October – 1 November 2012), discusses the Empowering Smallholder Farmers in the Markets (ESFIM) programme. ESFIM sought to generate demand-driven research supportive of the policy priorities and activities undertaken by farmers’ organizations that strengthens the advocacy capacities of national farmers’ organisations.
This brief was prepared for the "Session Partnerships for Livelihood Impacts" of the second Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD2), that took place from 29 October to 1 November 2012 in Punta del Este, Uruguay. According to this document, new organizational arrangements which place the user of research central in the definition of research priorities and in uptake processes are required.
The problem being addressed during this session of the Second Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD2), which was held in Punta del Este, Uruguay, in 2012, is how we can bring together the needed diversity – of stakeholders and approaches – and understand better a number of multidimensional and complex questions such as: How can we inform stakeholders on alternative future scenarios and debate the desirability, consequences, winners and losers of diverse scenarios? How to better combine quantitative analyses with qualitative arguments?
The paper discusses the role of advisory services within agricultural innovation systems; the importance of enhanced capacities for better performance at individual, organisational, and enabling environment level; the constraints and roles of actors at national, regional, and global level; and recommendations for action and partnerships to strengthen capacities and the role of advisory systems at all levels.
This document is about a session of the Second Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD2), which was held in Punta del Este, Uruguay, in 2012. The session focused on how to strengthen institutional capacities as well as multi-disciplinary and multi-organizational networking, including through improved policies, management practices, structures and incentives, so that institutions become more adaptive and responsive, as well as more effective in linking farmers, research, education, extension and development actors.
This paper attempts to identify the major factors associated with some of the failures and successes of integrated watershed management policies and projects with a particular emphasis on the uplands of mainland Southeast Asia. It argues that many policy measures have been misguided by failing to acknowledge the multi- dimensional facets of sustainable watershed management and putting too much emphasis on command-and-control approaches to resource management and one- size-fits-all conservation models.