Technological innovations have driven economic development and improvement in living conditions throughout history. However, the majority of smallholder farmers in sub‐Saharan Africa have seldom adopted or used science‐based technological innovations. Consequently, several scholars have been persistently questioning the effectiveness of intervention models in smallholder agriculture.
Growing local and informal markets in Asia and Africa provide both challenges and opportunities for small holders. In developing countries, market failures often lead to suboptimal performance of the value chains and limited and inequitable participation of the poor. In recent years, innovation platforms have been promoted as mechanisms to stimulate and support multistakeholder collaboration in the context of research for development. They are recognized as having the potential to link value chain actors, and enhance communication and collaboration to overcome market failures.
This chapter proposes a network-based framework to analyze and evaluate participatory and evidence-based policy processes. Four network based performance indicators are derived by incorporating a network model of political belief formation into a political bargaining model of the Baron–Grossmann–Helpman type. The application of our approach to the CAADP reform in Malawi delivers the following results: (i) beyond incentive problems, i.e.
Relying entirely on survey information and personal exchanges with over 70 scientists from within the CGIAR network, this working paper attempts to achieve a better understanding of the scope of social learning related efforts undertaken in CGIAR and main issues of relevance to more current efforts, such as that planned by the CGIAR program on Climate Change Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). A wide range of methods was identified, where groups of people learn in order to jointly arrive at solutions to pressing food security problems.
Here, it is described a new participatory protocol for assessing the climate-smartness of agricultural interventions in smallholder practices. This identifies farm-level indicators (and indices) for the food security and adaptation pillars of CSA. It also supports the participatory scoring of indicators, enabling baseline and future assessments of climate-smartness to be made. The protocol was tested among 72 farmers implementing a variety of CSA interventions in the climate-smart village of Lushoto, Tanzania.
This practitioner’s guide, a companion volume to The Innovation Paradox picks up where the previous report left off. It aims to help policy makers in developing countries better formulate innovation policies. It does so by providing a rigorous typology of innovation policy instruments, including evidence of impact—and more importantly, the critical conditions in terms of institutional capabilities to successfully implement these policy instruments in developing countries.
The Farmer Field School (FFS) approach has been very successful and witnessed a strong expansion in many areas beyond crop production. Notwithstanding this success, the adoption of FFS in national extension often remains problematic and FFS activities have often been implemented in the margin of national institutions with strong reliance on donor funding. The creation of an enabling environment for institutional support is essential for expanding the effort, improving quality, and strengthening impact and continuity of the FFSs.
The purpose of the paper, using a comprehensive innovation systems failure framework, is to assess the performance of agrifood innovation systems of Scotland and the Netherlands, through analysis of the key innovation actors (organisations, networks or influential individuals), and their key functions (research provider, intermediary etc), and those mechanisms that either facilitate or hinder the operation of the IS (known as inducing and blocking mechanisms, respectively).
This paper examines the level of heterogeneity of member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), regarding their potential and performance as Agricultural Sectoral Innovation Systems (ASIS). The main objective is the classification of the ASIS in an OECD context; based on a series of indicators that correspond to their productivity, competitiveness, social, economic and institutional conditions, as well as their capacities and innovation results.
Les démarches de développement local sont assez standardisées : à partir d'un diagnostic territorial, on met en oeuvre un appui technique et financier aux organisations locales, pour la réalisation de projets dont elles assureront la gestion. Mais les organisations locales sont de nature variée, toutes n'ont pas forcément envie de gérer les équipements qu'elles demandent ; ceux-ci sont plus ou moins complexes à gérer et certains relèvent des prérogatives communales. Enfin, le diagnostic initial dépend de la logique d'ensemble de l'action.