The question of how agricultural research can best be used for developmental purposes is a topic of some debate in developmental circles. The idea that this is simply a question of better transfer of ideas from research to farmers has been largely discredited. Agricultural innovation is a process that takes a multitude of different forms, and, within this process, agricultural research and expertise are mobilised at different points in time for different purposes. This paper uses two key analytical principles in order to find how research is actually put into use.
This paper reflects on the experience of the Research Into Use (RIU) projects in Asia. It reconfirms much of what has been known for many years about the way innovation takes place and finds that many of the shortcomings of RIU in Asia were precisely because lessons from previous research on agricultural innovation were “not put into use” in the programme’s implementation. However, the experience provides three important lessons for donors and governments to make use of agricultural research: (i) Promoting research into use requires enabling innovation.
The universal application of the T&V model of agricultural extension in more than 50 countries is one of agricultural development’s best known failures. The approach worked well in places where it was originally developed, but proved inappropriate almost everywhere else. In this report Rasheed Sulaiman V. and Andy Hall worry that an apparently successful extension innovation piloted in India is set to suffer a similar fate.
In recent years the there has been an increasing recognition of the potential of the innovation systems concept to provide new ways of making more effective use of agricultural research and improve its impact on socially desirable outcomes. This paper documents the experiences of a group of researchers in India who experimented with this framework and tried to operationalise its principles in project design. The paper comments on some of the implications of using this approach and the challenges it presents for implementers of agricultural research projects in developing countries.
This paper was prepared to present at the Farmer First Revisited: 20 Years On conference at the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK, December, 2007. Its focus is the challenge of strengthening agricultural innovation systems. The paper prefaces this discussion by reflecting on an apparent paradox. While agricultural innovation has never been better studied and understood, many of our ideas about innovation have failed to fundamentally change the institutional and policy setting of public and private investment intended to promote innovation for development.
Working with women in the agriculture sector in Pakistan poses a challenge as agricultural extension and development staff are predominantly male and interactions for women with men outside the family are culturally not acceptable. At the same time, women in Pakistan play an equal role in agriculture as well as taking responsibility for household chores, including cooking and taking care of the nutrition of the family.
Agriculture is crucial for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), involving approximately 50% of the economically active population and contributing an estimated 25% to the gross national product. However, agricultural production has remained low due to soil degradation and pest damage in cabbage and maize (particularly due to lepidopteron pests), amongst other reasons. To help improve productivity and address food security issues, CABI has been working in DPRK since 2002 to introduce integrated pest management (IPM).
In Nepal, the Plantwise programme, in collaboration with International Development Enterprises (iDE), has established networks of locally owned plant clinics, run by community business facilitators (CBFs) trained as plant doctors, who provide practical plant health advice. This study examines how gender is integrated into this programme in three purposively selected study districts. It presents the experiences of farmers, the challenges they faced in accessing plant health services through a gender and social inclusion lens.
Gender integration focuses on applying a gender lens to look at how social relations of gender and underlying power dynamics affect men’s and women’s participation in and benefit from development programmes. In Plantwise, gender mainstreaming aimed to (1) understand gender relations and how they affected access to agricultural advisory services and adoption of plant health management practices, and (2) remove gender related barriers to access and adoption and improve gender equity.
LenCD has prepared a joint statement on results and capacity development (presented in this publication), which stresses that meaningful, sustainable results are premised on proper investments in capacity development and that these results materialize at different levels and at different times, along countries’ development trajectory. To provide evidence in support of this statement, LenCD launched a call for submission of stories.