The paper explores the implications of rural livelihood diversity for agricultural innovation policies. It summarises literature on the nature of rural poverty, with particular emphasis on the relative roles of farm and non-farm income. It also reviews the various roles, direct and indirect, that agricultural innovation can play in rural poverty reduction. Finally, it uses an agricultural knowledge and information systems (AKIS) perspective to argue for a differentiated approach to targeting agricultural innovations, based on an analysis of rural assets.
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 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.
The private sector dominates biotechnology research in industrialized countries, but there are major market failures in developing countries in accessing the new tools and technologies. The public sector, national and international, will have to play a major role in filling this gap. This paper provides an overview of options that countries of different sizes and capacities can employ to gain access to the research tools and technologies that they need to address issues of relevance to poor producers and consumers.
The increasing complexity of technology development and adoption is rapidly changing the effectiveness of scientific and technological policies. Complex technologies are developed and disseminated by networks of agents. The impact of these networks depends on the assets they command, their learning routines, the socio-economic environment in which they operate and their history.
This paper argues that impact assessment research has not made more of a difference because the measurement of the economic impact has poor diagnostic power. In particular it fails to provide research managers with critical institutional lessons concerning ways of improving research and innovation as a process. Paper's contention is that the linear input-output assumptions of economic assessment need to be complemented by an analytical framework that recognizes systems of reflexive, learning interactions and their location in, and relationship with, their institutional context.
In the post-harvest area and in agriculture research in general, both in India and internationally, policy attention is returning to the question of how innovation can be encouraged and promoted and thus how impact on the poor can be achieved. This publication assembles several cases from the post-harvest sector. These provide examples of successful innovation that emerged in quite different ways. Its purpose is to illustrate and analyze the diversity and often highly context-specific nature of the processes that lead to and promote innovation.
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.