How do the innovation platforms and facilitated networks currently deployed in the Global South help trigger dynamics of collaborative innovation that can be useful for the agroecological transition? What are the difficulties encountered and how can they be overcome? This chapter throws lights on these questions. The first part justifies the interest in studying the ecologisation of agriculture through the prism of collaborative innovation and of its paradoxes.
This chapter reports on the different functions fulfilled by existing mechanisms for supporting collective innovation in the agricultural and agrifood sectors in the countries of the Global South in order to identify the potential contributions the research community can make to strengthen them. The authors show that a variety of mechanisms are needed to create enabling conditions for innovation and to provide a step-by-step support to innovation communities, according to their capacities and learning needs.
Research-based evidence on the adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices is vital to their effective uptake, continued use and wider diffusion. In addition, an enabling policy environment at the national and regional levels is necessary for this evidence to be used effectively. This chapter analyzes a 4-year period of continuous policy engagement in East Africa in an attempt to understand the role of multi-stakeholder platforms (MSPs) in facilitating an enabling policy environment for climate change adaptation and mitigation.
Farmers in the Lake Victoria crescent zone have over the years struggled with pests and diseases in a country full of fake agricultural inputs, access to markets, post-harvest losses, declining soil fertility and the changes of weather. The production for most farmers is rain fed and is greatly affected by climatic changes. The Mukono Wakiso innovation platform (IP) was formed to help farmers find solutions to these issues.
The research programme URBAL (Urban-driven Innovations for Sustainable Food Systems) (2018–2020), funded by Agropolis Fondation (France), Fondation Daniel & Nina Carasso (France/Spain), and Fundazione Cariplo (Italy), and coordinated by CIRAD (France) and the Laurier Center for Sustainable Food Systems at Wilfrid Laurier University (Canada), seeks to build and test a participatory methodology to identify and map the impact pathways of urban-driven innovations on all the dimensions of food systems sustainability.
Participatory Research (PR) at the International Potato Center (CIP) included seven major experiences. (1) Farmer-back-to-farmer in the 1970s pioneered the idea of working with farmers to identify their needs, propose solutions, and explain the underlying scientific concepts. The ideas were of great influence at CIP and beyond. (2) With integrated pest management (IPM) pilot areas in the early 1990s, entomologists and social scientists developed technologies with farmers in Peru and other countries to control insect pests.
Tool 9 provides general information and examples on the latest developments, uses and applications in the area of food biotechnology, and it focuses on genome (or gene) editing. It also provides examples that could help users of this toolkit to explain genome editing, the difference between genetic modification and genome editing and the potential benefits of these new technologies. In addition, it supports users to highlight possible research and development activities ongoing in their own country.
This book highlights the important links between agriculture and nutrition, both direct and indirect, both theoretical and practical. It explores these relationships through various frameworks, such as value chains, programmes and policies, as well as through diverse perspectives, such as gender. It assesses the impacts of various agricultural interventions and policies on nutrition and profiles the up-and-down journeys of countries such as Bangladesh, China, Ethiopia, India, and Malawi in integrating nutrition into agricultural policies and programmes.
This policy paper provides a macro-level picture of youth’s inability to access agriculture finance, and provides six major recommendations to policy makers: 1) promote financial literacy for youth 2) enhance the capability of financial institutions to assess agricultural sector opportunities; 3) African governments should produce and share reliable statistics on youth employment in agriculture and their financial inclusion; 4) policy makers should encourage special finance packages for young agripreneurs that do not require fixed collateral, e.g.