The study first identified fully efficient farmers and then estimated technical efficiency of inefficient farmers, identifying their determinants by applying a Zero Inefficiency Stochastic Frontier Model (ZISFM) on a sample of 300 rice farmers from central-northern Thailand. Next, the study developed scenarios of potential production increase and resource conservation if technical inefficiency was eliminated. Results revealed that 13% of the sampled farmers were fully efficient, thereby justifying the use of our approach.
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.
LenCD has prepared a joint statement on results and capacity development (presented in this publication), which stresses that meaningful, sustainable results are premised on proper investments in capacity development and that these results materialize at different levels and at different times, along countries’ development trajectory. To provide evidence in support of this statement, LenCD launched a call for submission of stories.
The purpose of this Guidance Note is to help countries to assess the quality of public spending on science, technology, and innovation (STI). It adopts a results-oriented framework, combining the consolidation of STI expenditures with the analysis of their main outputs, intermediate outcomes, and developmental impact. The framework proposes the analysis of three main sources of deficiencies: (i) program design/implementation; (ii) institutional conditions; and the (iii) composition and level of public expenditure.
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
Within agricultural innovation systems (AIS), various stakeholder groups inevitably interpret ‘innovation’ from their own vantage point of privilege and power. In rural developing areas where small-scale and subsistence farming systems support livelihoods, dominant policy actors often focus heavily on participatory modernization and commercialization initiatives to enhance productivity, access, and quality. However, existing social hierarchies may undermine the potential of such initiatives to promote inclusive and sustainable farmer-driven innovation.
The quest for innovation lies at the heart of European rural development policy and is integral to the Europe 2020 strategy. While social innovation has become a cornerstone of increased competitiveness and the rural situation legitimizes public intervention to encourage innovation, the challenges of its effective evaluation are compounded by the higher ‘failure’ rate implied by many traditional performance measures.
The use of technology in agriculture plays an important role in the production chain cycle, as well as in the improvement of processes and productivity. To develop a model for measuring the technological capacity of family agriculture systems, it is necessary to assess the gaps related to indicators and the technological potentialities of these farmer groups, which are often not considered when they require financial support and do not get enough. Thus, the aim of this study is to identify the indicators used to evaluate the technological capacity of farm systems and agriculture.
Since the entry into force of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in 2003, concerted efforts have focused on mobilizing international assistance to help developing countries build their institutional capacities in biosafety and meet their obligations under the treaty. The FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, in cooperation with the Government of Thailand, launched “Asian BioNet” – a regional initiative on capacity building in biosafety of genetically modified (GM) crops in Asia.
This is the final report of the fifth regional consultative forum meeting of the Asia-Pacific Fishery Commission (APFIC) convened in Hyderabad, India from 19 to 21 June 2014. It was attended by 85 participants from 17 countries and 28 national, regional and inter governmental partner organizations and projects. Forum participants came to the meeting to develop and reach consensus on ways of implementing policies and action plans designed to address the major challenges confronting the fisheries and aquaculture sectors in the region.