La présente note a pour objet de donner des éléments aux décideurs, au niveau national, pour leur permettre de procéder à des évaluations et de prendre les mesures voulues concernant la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition face au changement climatique. Elle comprend des informations générales sur l’effet que le changement climatique et la variabilité du climat ont sur les secteurs de l’agriculture et la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition et sur la façon dont ces secteurs et les habitudes alimentaires contribuent aux émissions de gaz à effet de serre.
L’objectif de cette note d’orientation est d’aider les chargés des politiques et les autres parties prenantes à favoriser un dialogue propre à renforcer l’attention portée à la sécurité alimentaire et à la nutrition dans les politiques en matière d’égalité des sexes.
In the framework of a wide Foresight process, launched by the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR) and aiming to identify possible scenarios for European agriculture in a 20-year perspective, DG RTD/E of the European Commission established a high-level Consultancy Expert Group (CEG) that analysed and synthesised foresight information in order to provide research policy orientations, tacking stock of the report from the first Foresight Expert Group (FEG) published in February 2007.
This evaluation examined the support the European Commission’s DG for Development and International Cooperation (DEVCO) provided to Research and Innovation (R&I) in partner countries during the last EU budget period (2007-2013). The objectives of the evaluation were to provide an overall judgment on the extent to which the EU development co-operation policy has adopted a strategic approach to support R&I and whether the approach was appropriate to enhance capacity to reach development objectives.
This document sets out how EU Research and Innovation (R&I) policy contributes to the major global challenge of ensuring food and nutrition security (FNS). It is a first step in the further development of a more coherent approach to European R&I which aims at mobilising resources and stakeholders to set out aligned R&I agendas in response to recent international political drivers such as the Sustainable Development Goals and the COP 21 climate commitments.
L’agriculture familiale est le modèle d’exploitation le plus répandu en Europe. À ce titre, elle assure depuis des siècles la prospérité du secteur. L’ambitieux cadre stratégique mis en place par l’Union européenne a été conçu pour tenir compte des différents modèles d’agriculture qui coexistent sur son territoire, en ce compris les divers types d’agriculture familiale.
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.
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.
This paper, using Thailand as a case study, aims at understanding the national innovation system (NIS) in developing countries which are less successful in technological catching-up. In contrast to developed countries, the development level of Thailand’s NIS does not link to its economic structural development level. As Thailand moves from agricultural to an increasingly industrial economy, its NIS remains weak and fragmented. The mismatch between the two affected Thailand’s competitiveness and partially contributed to the recent economic crisis.