The paper, prepared for the "High Level Policy Dialogue on Investment in Agricultural Research for Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific" (Bangkok Thailand; 8-9 December 2015), presents the Common Framework on Capacity Development for Agricultural Innovation Systems (CDAIS).The framework is a core component of the Action Plan of the TAP, a G20 Initiative, aiming to increase coherence and effectiveness of capacity development for agricultural innovation that lead to sustainable change and impact at scale.
The challenges of providing food security for the developing world have perhaps never been so extreme, with the introduction of new technologies being matched by land degradation, water concerns and the often uncertain impacts of a changing climate. In short, we will need to produce more food on less land. Adding to the problem is the distrust and fear around some new technologies – particularly biotechnologies – that have created a divide between scientists and farmers, decision makers and the public. There have been many attempts to bridge these divides, but few success stories.
In order to bring about sustainable transformation and business orientation into the Indian Agriculture sector, there have been schematic interventions to promote unique forms of social capital for farmers, called Farmer Producer organizations (FPOs). Many stakeholders, particularly NGOs, are involved in promoting and handholding these FPOs in a target-driven mode by promoting a large number of such institutions across the country.
India is witnessing dwindling gains from agriculture for the smallholder farmers because of high cost of inputs, changing climate impacting production, fluctuating market prices of outputs, and weak delivery of services at the last mile. The value share of farmers in the commodity supply chain needs to be increased to ensure that farming remains a remunerative livelihood option. There has to be a wider acceptance of the fact that the country needs partnerships among multiple players with complementary knowledge and expertise for its agricultural development.
The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) financed the second Cordillera Highland Agricultural Resource Management Project (CHARMP2), in areas where poverty is most severe among indigenous peoples in the highlands of the Cordillera Region in northern Philippines. The aim is to reduce poverty and improve the livelihoods of indigenous peoples living in farming communities in the mountainous project area. The indigenous peoples consist of many tribes whose main economic activity is agriculture.
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
The creation of Competitive Research Grants (CRGs) is globally recognized as an institutional innovation for improving the effectiveness of agricultural research. Unlike block grants for research, CRGs are expected to bring in many top-quality proposals from a wide range of actors, selecting the best out of them and thus getting more value for money.
This paper presents an overview of current opportunities and challenges facing efforts to increase the impact of rural and agricultural extension. The starting point for this analysis is in recognition that the days when agricultural extension was synonymous with the work of public sector agencies are over.
The purpose of this paper is to map some elements that can contribute to an IFAD strategy to stimulate and support pro-poor innovations. It is an initial or exploratory document that hopefully will add to an ongoing and necessary debate, and is not intended as a final position paper. The document is organized as follows.
There are divergent views on what capacity development might mean in relation to agricultural biotechnology. The core of this debate is whether this should involve the development of human capital and research infrastructure, or whether it should encompass a wider range of activities which also include developing the capacity to use knowledge productively. This paper uses the innovation systems concept to shed light on this discussion, arguing that it is innovation capacity rather than science and technology capacity that has to be developed.