Este trabajo describe la metodología e implementación de la Estrategia Comunicacional (EC) del proyecto “Aportes para el crecimiento, la equidad y la sustentabilidad del territorio diversificado de los partidos costeros de San Pedro y Baradero”, basado en el marco de la investigación participativa y transdisciplinar propia de la metaperspectiva de la Comunicación Estratégica (CE) de la Escuela de Rosario.
Este articulo describe la realización de talleres con la finalidad de reflexionar sobre las acciones de comunicación en el territorio que aborda el proyecto del INTA: “Aportes para el desarrollo sustentable del área geográfica Valle Central y Este de la provincia de Catamarca” Además, para la construcción de la estrategia de comunicación, los talleres formaron parte de un proceso que demandó varias instancias de reflexión y de cambio de mirada sobre el alcance de la comunicación. El primero se efectuó en noviembre del 2013, luego en el 2014 y otro en el 2016.
Argentine agriculture has undergone significant transformations over the past three decades. After a long period of stagnant production and productivity, starting in the early 1970s, a number of independent but interconnected events fostered a new technological cycle that induced rapid growth in cereals and oilseeds production. Zero tillage and the introduction of genetically modified soybean varieties were key elements of this change. Argentina reached a leading position across agricultural commodity markets.
Women often have less access to agricultural information than men, constraining their participation in decision-making on crops, technologies, and practices. In the design of agricultural extension programs, women may be viewed as insignificant actors in agricultural production. Moreover, even if their role is recognized, valuable information on production does not flow freely within the household from men to women.
This interactive guidebook brings together tools and resources to help practitioners design and implement capacity development activities with an innovation systems approach in mind.
This Thematic Research Note reviews the evolution of collective action among smallholders. It assesses determinants of their success such as incentives, capacities, and social impediments. The Note also discusses lessons and options for future action. These include lessons from collective action for market participation by African smallholders, value chain penetration by developed country farmers, and natural resources management among pastoralist communities.
The frequency of natural disasters, especially storms and floods, has been increasing globally over the last several decades. Developing countries are especially vulnerable to such disasters but are often the least capable of coping with the associated impacts because of their limited adaptive capacity. Despite the increased interest in strengthening institutional capacity, it remains a challenge for many developing countries. Institutional capacity for disaster management and risk reduction can be built through various mechanisms.
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 traces the evolution of the innovation systems framework within the agricultural sector in Sub-Saharan Africa, and presents a conceptual framework for agricultural innovation systems. The difference between innovation ecology/ecosystems and intervention-based innovations systems is highlighted, given that these two concepts are used at different levels in promoting and sustaining agricultural innovations.
The article provides a conceptual framework and discusses research methods for analyzing pluralistic agricultural advisory services. The framework can also assist policy-makers in identifying reform options. It addresses the following question: Which forms of providing and financing agricultural advisory services work best in which situation? The framework ‘disentangles’ agricultural advisory services by distinguishing between (1) governance structures, (2) capacity, (3) management, and (4) advisory methods.