Recently, a new approach to extension and climate information services, namely Participatory Integrated Climate Services for Agriculture (PICSA) has been developed. PICSA makes use of historical climate records, participatory decision-making tools and forecasts to help farmers identify and better plan livelihood options that are suited to local climate features and farmers’ own circumstances.
This special issue contains contributions from 42 authors representing 21 organizations and institutes around the world. Overall, the publication presents a number of innovations related to the key elements of climate risk management and resilience building in agriculture. The approaches, tools and methods are illustrated with case studies and examples from different parts of the world. While the innovations presented are not without certain limitations, any such limitations are identified and discussed, and recommendations are made for future research.
Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is increasingly seen as a promising approach to feed the growing world population under climate change. The review explored how institutional perspectives are reflected in the CSA literature. In total, 137 publications were analyzed using institutional analysis framework, of which 55.5% make specific reference to institutional dimensions. While the CSA concept encompasses three pillars (productivity, adaptation, and mitigation), the literature has hardly addressed them in an integrated way.
Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is an approach to help agricultural systems worldwide, concurrently addressing three challenge areas: increased adaptation to climate change, mitigation of climate change, and ensuring global food security – through innovative policies, practices, and financing. It involves a set of objectives and multiple transformative transitions for which there are newly identified knowledge gaps. We address these questions raised by CSA within three areas: conceptualization, implementation, and implications for policy and decision-makers.
This paper provides a review of agronomic management practices supporting sustainable crop production systems and intensification, and testifying to developments in the selection of crops and cultivars. The paper also describes crop farming systems taking a predominantly ecosystem approach and it discusses the scientific application of this approach for the management of pest and weed populations.
L’ouest du Rio Grande do Sul est dominé par la culture du soja, du riz et par l’élevage bovin. Dans la partie sableuse, le milieu est affecté par des phénomènes d’érosion produisant des modelés éoliens spectaculaires (arenização) rappelant dans l’imaginaire ceux des déserts. La production agricole est importante ce qui engendre des prélèvements d’eau pour l’irrigation du riz, mais aussi l’utilisation de pesticides pour l’ensemble des cultures. La gestion durable des ressources en eau et en sol de cette région nécessite la mise en place d’action de conservation.
Agricultural innovation in low-income tropical countries contributes to a more effective and sustainable use of natural resources and reduces hunger and poverty through economic development in rural areas. Yet, despite numerous recent public and private initiatives to develop capacities for agricultural innovation, such initiatives are often not well aligned with national efforts to revive existing Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS).
There are divergent views on what capacity development might mean in relation to agricultural biotechnology. The core of this debate is whether this should involve the development of human capital and research infrastructure, or whether it should encompass a wider range of activities which also include developing the capacity to use knowledge productively. This paper uses the innovation systems concept to shed light on this discussion, arguing that it is innovation capacity rather than science and technology capacity that has to be developed.
This paper, using Thailand as a case study, aims at understanding the national innovation system (NIS) in developing countries which are less successful in technological catching-up. In contrast to developed countries, the development level of Thailand’s NIS does not link to its economic structural development level. As Thailand moves from agricultural to an increasingly industrial economy, its NIS remains weak and fragmented. The mismatch between the two affected Thailand’s competitiveness and partially contributed to the recent economic crisis.
This article starts by describing the evolution of innovation in agricultural research and cooperation for development, including an historical overview of agricultural research for development from green revolution to the re-discover of traditional knowledge. Then the authors analyze participation in innovation processes and make a comparison of innovation systems and platforms targeting the agri-food sector in developing countries. A particular focus is reserved to the European regional networks and to the experience of the USAID Middle East Water and Livelihoods Initiative.