Capacity development is regarded by CGIAR as an effective vehicle for sustainable development, when embedded within broader CGIAR Research Programs (CRP). This document offers guidelines on how CGIAR and boundary partners (or those partners who take up and adapt research results for the next level of users) can successfully develop and implement strategies which support this process of integration.
This policy brief consolidates lessons learned from an in-depth literature review on small-scale farmer (SSF) innovation systems and a two-day expert consultation on the same topic, hosted in Geneva by Quaker United Nations Office (QUNO) in May 2015. This review draws together published literature on the evolution of the concept, how on-farm innovation systems function in practice, and the roles of outside actors in supporting them.
The international workshop on Agricultural Innovation Systems in Africa (AISA) was held in Nairobi, Kenya, on 29–31 May 2013. Its main objectives were to learn jointly about agricultural innovation processes and systems in Africa, identify policy implications and develop policy messages, and explore perspectives for collaborative action research on smallholder agricultural innovation.The workshop focused on sharing experiences in trying to understand and strengthen multi-stakeholder innovation processes and the role of smallholders in innovation, and identifying and discussing priorities an
L'article propose d'utiliser le concept de sécurisation alimentaire pour étudier les actions et processus qui améliorent une situation alimentaire, plutôt que celui de sécurité alimentaire qui se réfère avant tout à la satisfaction de besoins alimentaires. Dans une première partie, ces deux concepts sont précisés et discutés. La sécurité alimentaire est caractérisée selon plusieurs dimensions : disponibilités, conditions d'accès, qualités des aliments, stabilité, mais aussi objectifs sociaux et politiques.
El estudio buscó caracterizar dos elementos complementarios en el subcontinente latinoamericano: i) el surgimiento de políticas públicas específicas para el sector de la AF, y ii) la forma en que las políticas agrarias clásicas afectan ese sector. El documento consta de dos partes. La primera presenta un análisis transversal del conjunto de estudios de caso nacionales y la segunda parte presenta dichos estudios. Los trabajos de síntesis nacional fueron realizados a partir de la aplicación de una guía de análisis común que comportaba cinco bloques: 1.
Within the context of the European-funded JOLISAA FP7 project (JOint Learning in Innovation Systems in African Agriculture), several agricultural innovation experiences focused on smallholders were assessed in Benin, Kenya and South Africa. Fifty-six cases were characterised through review of grey literature and interviews with resource persons according to a common analytical framework inspired by the innovation systems perspective. Of these, 13 were assessed in greater depth through semistructured interviews, focus-group discussions and multistakeholder workshops.
Ce rapport présente les principaux résultats acquis sur la période févier 2017 à mars 2018, ainsi que les leçons et perspectives.
Farmers and businesses need to adapt constantly if they are to survive and compete in the rapidly evolving environment associated with the contemporary agricultural sector. Rethinking agricultural research as part of a dynamic system of innovation could help to design ways of creating and sustaining conditions that will support the process of adaptation and innovation. This approach involves developing the working styles and practices of individuals and organizations and the incentives, support structures and policy environments that encourage innovation.
Multi-stakeholder or innovation platforms are increasingly seen as a promising vehicle for agricultural innovation and development. In the field of agricultural research for development (AR4D), such platforms are an important element of a commitment to more intentional, structured and long-term engagement among sector stakeholders.
The capacity of existing monitoring and decision making tools in generating evidence about the performance of R4D with multi-stakeholder processes, such as innovation platforms (IPs), public private partnerships (PPP), participatory value chain management (PVCM) is very limited. Results of these tools are either contextual and qualitative such as case studies that can not be used by other R4D interventions or quantitative i.e. impact assessments that do not inform what works in R4D.