Early applications of the innovation systems framework to developing-country agriculture suggest opportunities for more intensive and extensive analysis. There is ample scope for empirical studies to make greater use of the theoretical content available in the literature, and to employ more diverse methodologies, both qualitative and quantitative. Further, there is room to improve the relevance of empirical studies to the analysis of public policies that support science, technology, and innovation, as well as to policies that promote poverty reduction and economic growth.

This paper was presented at the Farmer First Revisited: 20 Years On conference at IDS, University of Sussex, UK, December 2007. Its focus is the challenge of strengthening agricultural innovation systems. The paper prefaces this discussion by reflecting on an apparent paradox. While agricultural innovation has never been better studied and understood, many of our ideas about innovation have failed to fundamentally change the institutional and policy setting of public and private investment intended to promote innovation for development.

This note offers a conceptual framework for dealing with 1) institutional and capacity assessment; and 2) capacity development issues, mainly in the public sector areas. This framework will be particularly useful in the in the preparation of support to sector programmes and budget support exercises.

The role of civil society in influencing public opinion towards more democratic and developmental approaches is now well-recognised in diverse fields such as health, education, livelihoods, issues relating to disadvantaged social groups and the environment. Yet, science and technology in India is predominantly seen as the preserve of the state, and more recently the market. In the linear model of innovation, civil society is seen at best as having a role in extension or the delivery of technology produced elsewhere.

This report discusses general innovation issues and how they are affecting economic growth. It emphasizes how the advances in ICT, biotechnology and other fields of science are changing the innovation landscape and what are the implications for CD.

Despite increasing interest and support for multi-stakeholder partnerships, empirical applications of participatory evaluation approaches to enhance learning from partnerships are either uncommon or undocumented. This paper draws lessons on the use of participatory self-reflective approaches that facilitate structured learning on processes and outcomes of partnerships. Such practice is important to building partnerships, because it helps partners understand how they can develop more collaborative and responsive ways of managing partnerships.

The UNDP Capacity Assessment Methodology User‘s Guide gives UNDP and other development practitioners a detailed step-by-step guide to conducting a capacity assessment using the UNDP Capacity Assessment Methodology, which consists of the UNDP Capacity Assessment Framework, a three-step process and supporting tools. 

This report sets out the synthesis of work carried out within the framework of the Sahel and West Africa Club (SWAC) Secretariat Initiative on “The family economy and agricultural innovation: towards new partnerships”. The initiative aimed to stimulate analyses, collect field data and case studies that encourage debates between regional actors, with a view to informing the development of regional policies and actions in order to promote and strengthen producer access to agricultural innovation, where most producers are anchored in the family economy.

The flyer  points up an overview of: (i) new approaches to capacity building and institutional change; (ii) ICRA’s role in the South; (iii) ICRA’s role in the North and in linking South and North.  

This chapter deals with capacity development (CD), which has been a core issue in international development cooperation policies and practices for decades. The first section outlines what CD entails, why is it important and why at the same time it is so difficult to grasp. A distinction is made between capacity at the individual, organisational/institutional and societal level. The unequal relationship between donors and recipients, which has often led to unsatisfactory progress and results in CD, is briefly discussed.