Le développement de l'agriculture organique au Brésil prend des formes multiples. Au travers de leur expérience de l'AO, dans une communauté proche de trois métropoles, de petits maraîchers d'Ibiúna (São Paulo) créent des entités collectives et expérimentent de nouvelles pratiques sociales.
Le développement territorial durable requiert des innovations aussi bien techniques, que sociales et institutionnelles. Favoriser ces innovations est l'objectif des récentes démarches d'ingénierie territoriale qui adaptent les processus d'innovation développés en entreprise. Dans cet article, la pertinence de cette orientation est discutée en s'appuyant sur les enseignements d'une recherche-action, menée dans un territoire « fragilisé » : l' « Alto Sertão du Piauí et du Pernambouco », dans le Nordeste brésilien.
La consommation de produits certifiés n’est plus l’apanage des pays développés. Au Kenya, les premiers marchés biologiques sont apparus à Nairobi en 2006. Ils sont approvisionnés par des maraîchers, confrontés à une diversité de défis : construire une certification biologique crédible, garantir la fraîcheur des produits et composer avec l’hétérogénéité des attentes des consommateurs. À partir de données d’enquête et du cadre analytique des coûts de transaction, nous analysons l’organisation des marchés de 2006 à 2013.
Social learning in multi-actor innovation networks is increasingly considered an important precondition for addressing sustainability in regional development contexts. Social learning is seen as a means for enabling stakeholders to take advantage of the diversity in perspectives, interests and values for generating more sustainable practices and policies. Although more and more research is done on the meaning and manifestations of social learning, particularly in the context of natural resource management, little is known about the social dynamics in the process of social learning.
The emergence of a globalised knowledge economy, and the contemporary views of innovation capacity that this trend enables and informs, provides a new context in which development assistance to agricultural research and development needs to be considered. The main argument in this paper, which focuses on The Netherlands, is that development assistance should use this emerging scenario to identify niches where inputs can add value to the R&D investments of others, particularly in activities that help wire up innovation systems, linking R&D to other activities and actors in society.
This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion in the scientific literature on the advantages and disadvantages of privatization of extension and advisory services and the shift from thinking in terms of the traditional Agricultural Knowledge System towards a broader Agricultural Innovation System.
In the systems perspective on innovation, co-operation between several different types of actors is seen as key to successful innovation. Due to the existence of several gaps that hinder such effective co-operation, the scientific and policy literature persistently points at the need for intermediary organizations to fulfill bridging and brokerage roles. This paper aims to provide an overview of the insights from the literature on such ‘innovation brokers’, and to contribute to the literature by distilling lines of enquiry and providing insights on one of the lines identified.
This presentation argues the need of green growth in agriculture, analyzes features of the innovation systems and ends with some policies practices. The presentation has been prepared for "Innovation and Modernising the Rural Economy", OECD’s 8th Rural Development Policy Conference, 3-5 October 2012 (Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation).
This paper, presented at the 8th European IFSA Symposium ( Workshop 6: "Change in knowledge systems and extension services: Role of the new actors") in 2008, discusses the innovation network Waardewerken, a Dutch network of rural entrepreneurs pioneering in multifunctional agriculture. which aims to contribute to a professional multifunctional agriculture sector in the Netherlands. For this purpose it cooperates with researchers and policymakers in order to improve policy conditions and to develop knowledge for multifunctional farmers.
This report provides a synthesis of all findings and information generated through a “stocktaking” process that involved a desk study of Prolinnova documents and evaluation reports, a questionnaire to 40 staff members of international organizations in agricultural research and development (ARD), self-assessment by the Country Platforms (CPs) and backstopping visits to five CPs. In 2014, the Prolinnova network saw a need to re-strategise in a changing context, and started this process by reviewing the activities it had undertaken and assessing its own functioning.