This paper draws lessons from selected country experiences of adaptation and innovation in pursuit of food security goals.
Innovation system approach offers an holistic, multidisciplinary and comprehensive framework for analyzing innovation process, the roles of science and technology actors and their interactions, emphazing on wider stakeholder participation, linkages and institutional context of innovation and processes. This paper was aimed to: 1. review the concept of innovation system; 2. appraise the application to agriculture and its relevance and 3. analyze the policy implications for agricultural extension delivery in Nigeria.
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.
This report describes the 2012 NAIS Assessment was piloted in 4 countries: Botswana, Ghana, Kenya and Zambia. Data were collected through a survey questionnaire, open-ended interview questions, and data mining of secondary sources. A team led by a national coordinator took charge of data collection from various partner organizations in each country.
This paper investigates Innovation Systems Concepts and Principles starting with an historical perspective. Then it analyzes their application to Integrated Agricultural Research for Development (IAR4D) and makes a comparison between the traditional Research and Development Systems Approaches and the Innovation Systems Approach.
Coordinated formal efforts to generate technologies for enhancing agricultural development in Ethiopia was mainly rooted in formal research and development institutions up to very recently. A number of improved technologies have been generated wlth the efforts made so far and the superiority of some of the technologies over the traditional practices has already been proved, at least for the major commodities.
Dans plusieurs domaines des sciences sociales et humaines (éducation, communication, travail social, économie sociale, médecine communautaire, technologie rurale, et pratiques politiques et syndicales, entre autres), et même dans les sciences dites « dures », la recherche appartient de moins en moins à un monde à part de spécialistes éloignés du terrain. Ce type de recherches – recherche participative, recherche-action, recherche collaborative, recherche-formation – se caractérise par un processus de production des connaissances effectué de concert avec les acteurs de terrain.
Les démarches participatives suscitent un intérêt grandissant en tant que pratiques de recherche en agriculture. Dans l'objectif de faciliter les échanges de pratiques entre chercheurs, cet article propose une grille d'analyse qui appréhende le processus de participation de façon globale et dynamique.
Most agencies supporting agricultural research in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) provide funds for discrete projects over specific periods of time, usually a maximum of three years. Research topics identified for calls for proposals are not always well aligned with users’ needs. In particular, research topics may not reflect the priorities of organizations - such as farmer organizations and private agribusinesses, with interests in the research outcomes; they are not generally supported to play a significant role as project partners.
La plupart des agences qui soutiennent la recherche agricole en Afrique subsaharienne fournissent des financements à des projets distincts durant des périodes spécifiques, en général pour une durée maximale de trois ans. Les sujets de recherche identifiés pour les appels à propositions ne correspondent pas toujours aux besoins des utilisateurs. Ils peuvent, en particulier, ne pas refléter les priorités des organisations – comme les organisations paysannes ou les entreprises agricoles privées, pourtant intéressées par les résultats de la recherche.