Increasing investment and spending in agricultural innovation is not enough to meet Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets of ending poverty and hunger because the effectiveness of investments in low- and middle-income (LMI) countries is affected by the low quality of infrastructure and services provided, and by different norms and practices that create a considerable gap between financing known technical solutions and achieving the outcomes called for in the SDGs.
This final Deliverable of SALSA's WP4 'Participatory foresight analysis' aims to make a reflection precisely about the participatory character of the activities undertaken and the outcomes obtained in this WP. Namely, the objective of this deliverable is twofold: (i) to assess the engagement of stakeholders in these participatory scenario planning activities, and (ii) to discuss the legitimacy of the scenario planning method adopted in this research. In total, the regional foresight workshops held as part of this WP involved 243 participants, with women representing 42%.
World Bank Institute (WBI) works to improve the understanding, practice and results of capacity development, an important way to support development goals and priorities for aid effectiveness. WBI developed the Capacity Development and Results Framework (CDRF), as a strategic and country-led approach to capacity development that emphasizes the empowerment of local agents through learning, knowledge and innovation.
This study, conducted by the World Bank at the request of the Government, is motivated by the need to understand Malaysia’s progress in facilitating the shift to a knowledge-focused economy.
This paper explores the application of the innovation systems framework to the design and construction of national agricultural innovation indicators. Optimally, these indicators could be used to gauge and benchmark national performance in developing more responsive, dynamic, and innovative agricultural sectors in developing countries.
This Economic and Sector Work paper, “Enhancing Agricultural Innovation: How to Go Beyond the Strengthening of Research Systems,” was initiated as a result of the international workshop, “Development of Research Systems to Support the Changing Agricultural Sector,” organized by the Agriculture and Rural Development Department of the World Bank in June 2004 in Washington, DC.
Given the diversity and context-specificity of innovation systems approaches, in March 2007 the World Bank organized a workshop in which about 80 experts (representing donor agencies, development and related agencies, academia, and the World Bank) took stock of recent experiences with innovation systems in agriculture and reconsidered strategies for their future development. This paper summarizes the workshop findings and uses them to develop and discuss key issues in applying the innovation systems concept. The workshop’s recommendations, including next steps for the wider
This book examines how agricultural innovation arises in four African countries – Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda – through the lens of agribusiness, public policies, and specific value chains for food staples, high value products, and livestock. Determinants of innovation are not viewed individually but within the context of a complex agricultural innovation system involving many actors and interactions.
The paper discusses the work force development (Wfd) tool that places explicit focus on three functional dimensions of Wfd policies and institutions: (a) strategy; (b) system oversight; and (c) service delivery. Strategy refers to the alignment between workforce development and a country’s national goals for economic and social development. System oversight refers to the governance arrangements that shape the behaviors key stakeholders involved, including individuals, employers, and training providers.
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.