Cet article revient sur l’activisme des multinationales de l’agrofourniture et de l’agroalimentaire dans la gouvernance du secteur agricole. Pour ce faire nous nous appuyons sur deux cas de figure qui ont trait à la conception et à la diffusion d’innovations à l’échelle internationale : la technique du semis direct, et la mise en place de systèmes de certification « durable » des principales matières premières agricoles.
Fin des années 1990 : le Brésil adopte une politique agricole duale fondée sur l’appui à l’agrobusiness et à l’agriculture familiale. Dans ce contexte, l’un des principaux enjeux porte sur la définition d’un modèle agricole destiné à améliorer le soutien à une agriculture familiale longtemps niée par les politiques agricoles successives. Cet article participe à cette réflexion, toujours d’actualité, en discutant les difficultés d’accompagnement de la « modernisation » de ce type d’agriculture.
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) partnered with the Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions (APAARI) in 2011 to conduct a series of policy dialogues on the prioritization of demand-driven agricultural research for development in South Asia. Dialogues were conducted with a wide range of stakeholders in Bangladesh, India, and Nepal in mid-2012 and this report captures feedback from those dialogues.
The Webinar with Universities on Capacity Development for Agricultural Innovation - Bringing System-wide Change in Asia-Pacific took place on 16 November 2017, 13:00hrs (CET) under the Tropical Agriculture Platform (TAP) hosted by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions (APAARI) organized and moderated the webinar, with support from FAO, the Global Confederation of Higher Education Associations for Agricultural and Life Sciences (GCHERA) and Global Forum for Agricultural Research (GFAR).
The Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions (APAARI) in collaboration with the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), Department of Agriculture (DOA), Thailand, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations – Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (FAO RAP), Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR) and International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), organized a High Level Policy Dialogue (HLPD) on Investment in Agricultural Research for Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific on 8-9 December 2015 in Bangkok, Th
This book documents a unique series of 19 case studies where agricultural biotechnologies were used to serve the needs of smallholders in developing countries. They cover different regions, production systems, species and underlying socio-economic conditions in the crop (seven case studies), livestock (seven) and aquaculture/fisheries (five) sectors. Most of the case studies involve a single crop, livestock or fish species and a single biotechnology.
Traditional approaches to innovation systems policymaking and governance often focus exclusively on the central provision of services, regulations, fiscal measures, and subsidies.
The Sourcebook is the outcome of joint planning, continued interest in gender and agriculture, and concerted efforts by the World Bank, FAO, and IFAD. The purpose of the Sourcebook is to act as a guide for practitioners and technical staff inaddressing gender issues and integrating gender-responsive actions in the design and implementation of agricultural projects and programs. It speaks not with gender specialists on how to improve their skills but rather reaches out to technical experts to guide them in thinking through how to integrate gender dimensions into their operations.
The purpose of this paper is to map some elements that can contribute to an IFAD strategy to stimulate and support pro-poor innovations. It is an initial or exploratory document that hopefully will add to an ongoing and necessary debate, and is not intended as a final position paper. The document is organized as follows.
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.