The paper discusses the work force development (Wfd) tool that places explicit focus on three functional dimensions of Wfd policies and institutions: (a) strategy; (b) system oversight; and (c) service delivery. Strategy refers to the alignment between workforce development and a country’s national goals for economic and social development. System oversight refers to the governance arrangements that shape the behaviors key stakeholders involved, including individuals, employers, and training providers.
This PowerPoint document was presented during the OECD-ASEAN Regional Conference on Agricultural Policies to Promote Food Security and Agro-Forestry Productivity (Seoul, South Korea, 12-13 October 2015). The presentation outline is the the following: 1) About SEARCA; 2) Analytical Framework on AIS; 3) Governance of Innovation Systems; 4) Investing in Innovation; 5) Facilitating Knowledge Flows; 6) Strengthening Cross-Country Supply of Agricultural Innovation; 7) The Survey.
This work has largely focused on the developed world, yet the majority of people and future economic growth lies in the developing world. Further, most research examines micro data on consumers or firms, limiting what is known regarding the role of macro factors on diffusion, such as social systems. Addressing these limitations, this research provides the first high-level insights into how green building adoption is occurring in developing countries.
World Bank Institute (WBI) works to improve the understanding, practice and results of capacity development, an important way to support development goals and priorities for aid effectiveness. WBI developed the Capacity Development and Results Framework (CDRF), as a strategic and country-led approach to capacity development that emphasizes the empowerment of local agents through learning, knowledge and innovation.
This study, conducted by the World Bank at the request of the Government, is motivated by the need to understand Malaysia’s progress in facilitating the shift to a knowledge-focused economy.
This paper explores the application of the innovation systems framework to the design and construction of national agricultural innovation indicators. Optimally, these indicators could be used to gauge and benchmark national performance in developing more responsive, dynamic, and innovative agricultural sectors in developing countries.
This Economic and Sector Work paper, “Enhancing Agricultural Innovation: How to Go Beyond the Strengthening of Research Systems,” was initiated as a result of the international workshop, “Development of Research Systems to Support the Changing Agricultural Sector,” organized by the Agriculture and Rural Development Department of the World Bank in June 2004 in Washington, DC.
Given the diversity and context-specificity of innovation systems approaches, in March 2007 the World Bank organized a workshop in which about 80 experts (representing donor agencies, development and related agencies, academia, and the World Bank) took stock of recent experiences with innovation systems in agriculture and reconsidered strategies for their future development. This paper summarizes the workshop findings and uses them to develop and discuss key issues in applying the innovation systems concept. The workshop’s recommendations, including next steps for the wider
This book examines how agricultural innovation arises in four African countries – Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda – through the lens of agribusiness, public policies, and specific value chains for food staples, high value products, and livestock. Determinants of innovation are not viewed individually but within the context of a complex agricultural innovation system involving many actors and interactions.
This set of guidance notes is designed to support practitioners and evaluators in conducting retrospective evaluations of a capacity development intervention or portfolio to assess and document results. Users will enhance their understanding of the capacity development process, of what works and what does not work in promoting change and to inform future programs. The standard M&E approach for assessing capacity development results has not been sufficient.