Following the remarkable success of performance testing in the commercial sector, the Agricultural Research Council's Animal Improvement Institute (ARC–AII) initiated a beef cattle performance testing scheme for smallholder farmers in 1996. The scheme, which became known as Kaonafatsho ya Dikgomo (Sotho for animal improvement), has been running well in the Northern and North West Provinces and is set to spread gradually to the rest of the country.
The aim of this paper is to show the importance of monitoring genetic improvement programmes using the examples of an improvement programme for the Sahiwal breed in Kenya and a progeny testing scheme for Friesian cattle in Kenya. The paper is based on reports by Rege et al. (1992) and Rege and Wakhungu (1992) for the Sahiwal project and Rege (1991a and 1991b) for the progeny testing scheme for Friesian cattle.
This paper develops a quantitative, graph-theoretic method for analysing systems of institutions. With an application to the agricultural innovation system of Azerbaijan, the method is illustrated in detail. An assessment of existing institutional linkages in the system suggests that efforts should be placed on the development of intermediary institutions to facilitate quick and effective flow of knowledge between the public and the private components of the system.
This paper is an attempt to take stock of the authors' work. In Section 2, the authors reflect upon the emergence and fairly rapid diffusion of the concept ‘national system of innovation’ as well as related concepts. In Section 3, they describe how the Aalborg-version of the concept evolved by a combination of ideas that moved from production structure towards including all elements and relationships contributing to innovation and competence building.
In times of market liberalization and structural adjustment, the agricultural sectors of developing countries face profound changes. To seize new market opportunities, farmers need to innovate. In order to innovate, farmers need new technologies and information on how to access and manage them, as well as better support services for the delivery of inputs and knowledge, and better infrastructure for delivering produce to the market.
There is increasing evidence that public organizations dedicated exclusively to research and development (R&D) in agribusiness need systematic management tools to incorporate the uncertainties and complexities of technological and nontechnological factors of external environments in its long-term strategic plans. The major issues are: What will be the agribusiness science and technology (S&T) needs be in the future? How to prepare in order to meet these needs?
La façon donc les organismes de recherche et d'appui aux agriculteurs participent aux processus de développement de l'agriculture et du monde rural fait l'objet de débats. Ceux-ci portent à la fois sur la compréhension des besoins réels des agriculteurs et sur les formes de coordination entre les différents acteurs de la production de connaissances traduisibles en actions. Nous proposons d'illustrer cette problématique à partir d'un programme de coopération franco-argentin Innovaciones, Desarrollo, Exploitationes Agropecuarias, Sociedad local (IDEAS), engagé en Argentine en 1995-1996.
La présente note commence par indiquer brièvement en quoi une politique de la concurrence est importante pour les économies en développement et en transition. Elle aborde ensuite certains éléments essentiels de l’établissement d’une culture de la concurrence. Idéalement, ce processus devrait tout d’abord consister en une « évaluation des besoins » dans différents domaines, qui permettra probablement de dresser une liste de mesures à hiérarchiser et à prendre.
This paper reviews a recent donor-funded project concerning the introduction of post-harvest technology to poor hill farmers in India. Rather than conform to conventional development aid projects of either a “research” or an “interventionist” nature, it combines both approaches in a research-action program, which has more in common with a business development approach than a formal social science one. An important conclusion is that the work (and apparent success) of the project is consistent with an understanding of development that emphasizes the importance of innovation systems.
This document will try to outline the main specific characteristics of the thematic area of Post Harvest and Rural innovation. Also, following the Regional Priority Setting Exercise1, and the analysis of various initiatives (see annex 1), it will try to underline which commonalties and research priorities have been identified within the broad concept of this thematic area.