The poor performance of agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa is known to be largely due to the lack of effective and client- responsive agricultural research and development that could generate appropriate technologies and innovations to stimulate the agricultural development process. As a contribution to address this challenge, the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA), with support from the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID), developed a project for Strengthening Capacity for Agricultural Research and Development in Africa (SCARDA).
This Practical Guide to Capacity Development in a Sector Context has been compiled to accompany Asian Development Bank (ADB)’s Capacity Development Framework and Action Plan. Its purpose is to provide ADB staff and other development practitioners with a set of tools and instruments that can be used to guide capacity development processes. The range of tools and instruments compiled in this guide starts from a sector-wide perspective (political economy and governance features) then moves down to capture individual stakeholders’ perspective.
Recent discourse in the field of participatory agricultural research has focused on how to blend vari- ous forms and intensities of stakeholder participation with quality agricultural science, moving beyond the simple ‘‘farmer-first’’ ideology of the 1980s and early 1990s.
The purpose of this paper is to re-examine the role that benchmarking can play in rural and agricultural innovations. Although generally known as 'traditional sector', rural activities are far from static but rather driven by old and new challenges pleading for innovative responses. Despite the broad range of insights from the burgeoning literature on innovation systems during the last decade, most benchmarking thinking and practice still remains highly science-based and centred in promoting public R&D, especially in developing countries.
The book documents a diversity of approaches for and results from the development of innovation processes (endorsing the definition proposed by FARA) through a review of twelve agricultural platforms in sub-Saharan Africa. These cases are far from exhaustive but nevertheless bring up a wealth of experiences. The authors do not pretend to present a model or template for the perfect innovation platform. To the contrary – they do not believe this is possible.
This review of literature on evaluation methods focuses specifically on approaches and methodologies in evaluation which are relevant for evaluating initiatives in extension or rural advisory services. The context and scope of the review are discussed, followed by sections addressing the purposes, users and uses of evaluation, evaluation standards and criteria, approaches, rigour and attribution.
This presentation outlines the following topics:a) Changing Context of Agricultural Technology Transfer: Emerging Realities in Asia-PacifiC; b) Technology Transfer within the Agricultural Innovation System; c) Agricultural Extension in Agricultural Innovation System; d) Supply Chain Management Approach and the Role of Extension; e) Major Areas for Mobilizing the Potential of Agricultural Extension/Rural Advisory Services.
This World Bank Institute Capacity Development and Results Practice focuses on the areas of institutional capacity and their contributing characteristics which can help development practitioners to assess institutional capacity needs, inform program design and measure progress toward results for a capacity development strategy or intervention.
This reference document describes a comprehensive approach for planning, monitoring and evaluation of capacity and the results of capacity development processes. This capacity framework used centres around 5 capabilities (‘5Cs’) that together contribute to an organisation’s ability to create social value. The document has been written for development practitioners in Southern organisations and planning, monitoring and evaluation professionals with whom they collaborate. As the title implies, it is not itself a handbook or a ‘tool’.
This paper reflects on the experience of the Research Into Use (RIU) projects in Asia. It reconfirms much of what has been known for many years about the way innovation takes place and finds that many of the shortcomings of RIU in Asia were precisely because lessons from previous research on agricultural innovation were “not put into use” in the programme’s implementation. However, the experience provides three important lessons for donors and governments to make use of agricultural research: (i) Promoting research into use requires enabling innovation.