Rwanda has experienced exceptional economic growth since 2000 despite more than 60% of the predominately-agrarian population living on less than $1.25 a day. Approximately 76% of the country’s working population are engaged in agricultural production, which makes up about one-third of the national economy. Agriculture is also an important source of foreign exchange, making up about 63% of the value of Rwanda’s exports.
Inclusive business models dominate current development policy and practices aimed at addressing food and nutrition insecurity among smallholder farmers. Through inclusive agribusiness, smallholder food security is presumed to come from increased farm productivity (food availability) and income (food access). Based on recent research, the focus of impact assessments of inclusive business models has been limited to instrumental aspects, such as the number of farmers supported, the training provided, and immediate farm outcomes, namely revenue.
This document presents a proposed methodology for public expenditure review and analysis for climate change adaptation and mitigation in the agriculture sector (PERCC) and its application to a case study of Kenya. It starts by explaining the basic methodological concepts, classification and labelling of public expenditures that allow for calculating spending in agriculture related to climate change adaptation and mitigation.
There are growing expectations that Information and Communication Technology (ICT) applications could help improve on-farm yields amongst smallholder farmers in developing countries, and consequently, food and nutrition security. However, few studies have quantified the actual contribution of ICT applications on farmers’ yields, and these studies predominantly focused on crop production. We assessed the potential of ICT applications to close milk yield gaps among small- and medium scale dairy cattle farmers in Africa.
The COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken by governments on social distancing and mobility restrictions have contributed to boosting the use of digital technology to bridge some of the physical access gaps. An increasing number of services and extension/information activities are delivered through digital tools and applications. E-commerce has also flourished. As a result, the potential of digital technologies has gained prominence in immediate response and recovery strategies and programmes.
The challenges faced by agricultural systems call for an advance in risk management (RM) assessments. This research identifies and discusses potential improvements to RM across 11 European Union (EU) farming systems (FS). The paper proposes a comprehensive, participatory approach that accounts for multi-stakeholder perspectives relying on 11 focus groups for brainstorming and gathering suggestions to improve RM.
Agriculture is crucial for the livelihood of millions of people worldwide and is one of the main drivers of deforestation, biodiversity loss and resource degradation. The contribution of agriculture to these environmental problems has been exacerbated by subsidies, which constitute the dominant public policy to support farmers. At the same time, other economic instruments introducing more sustainable land-use practices and incentivizing better environmental and social outcomes are already being applied worldwide.
The study was designed to answer the following three key questions:
(1) What types of investment instruments have been tested to support innovation in agri-food systems in the Global South, and how can these be categorized into a working typology?
(2) What is the evidence on how well different instruments have supported SAI's multiple objectives (e.g. social equality and environmental) at scale and what contextual and design factors affect their success or failure in achieving these objectives (e.g. type of value chain, who participates)?
What are the patterns of funding in agricultural innovation for the Global South1 ? Who are the key funders in this innovation and who are the key recipients? How doesthis funding split between various topics and value chains? What proportion of these funds support Sustainable Agricultural Intensification (SAI)? And how is SAI innovation funding split across different parts of the agriculture sector funding and innovation canvas?