Innovation learning platforms have their roots in the agricultural innovation systems (AIS) approach. AIS emphasizes a systems view of agricultural innovations and conceptualizes an innovation system as all individuals and organizations that keep on interacting in producing and using knowledge and the institutional context of knowledge sharing and learning. Research creates knowledge and technology; but innovation process goes further to include putting that knowledge into use.
En el municipio de Tepalcingo, en el estado de Morelos, los productores suelen fertilizar los campos de maíz únicamente con nitrógeno y fósforo, lo cual podría limitar su producción. Esto es ocasionado por la falta de un análisis de suelo. Por otro lado la información, sobre fechas y densidades de siembra optimas al igual que la identificación de los mejores híbridos, esta limitando los rendimientos de la región.
PESA focaliza sus acciones en “Apoyar a las Unidades de Producción Familiar en localidades rurales de alta y muy alta marginación, para incrementar los niveles de producción y productividad de sus actividades agropecuarias, acuícolas y pesqueras…”.
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.
The design of capacity development interventions is a crucial phase in the capacity development (CD) for agricultural innovation systems (AIS) cycle of the TAP Common Framework. Intervention planning follows from and builds on the visioning exercises and needs assessments carried out beforehand. Options for CD interventions will depend on the country context, ongoing programmes and funding opportunities. Prioritization should also include identification of activities that can take off immediately.
Several posters have been created on the occasion of the 5th TAP Partners Assembly (Laos, 20-22 September 2017) to show recent activities and achievements in the eight pilot countries of the CDAIS project.
Several posters have been created on the occasion of the 5th TAP Partners Assembly (Laos, 20-22 September 2017) to show recent activities and achievements in the eight pilot countries of the CDAIS project.
Several posters have been created on the occasion of the 5th TAP Partners Assembly (Laos, 20-22 September 2017) to show recent activities and achievements in the eight pilot countries of the CDAIS project.