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 to establish how research is actually put into use. The first, which concerns the configurations of organisations and their relationships associated with innovation, reveals the additional set of resources and expertise that research needs to be married to, and sheds light on the types of arrangements that allow this marriage to take place.
This guide is intended to assist facilitators in conducting a workshop with Extension and Advisory Service (EAS) providers for assessing their capacity needs. This guide has been compiled by the Centre for Research on Innovation and Science Policy (CRISP) for AESA with the assistance of a research grant from the Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services (GFRAS).
In early 2020, GFRAS provided support to the Agricultural Extension in South Asia (AESA) Network and the Bangladesh Agricultural Extension Network (BAEN) in order to customize one of the NELK Modules in the context of Bangladesh. The BAEN Executive Committee selected the GFRAS NELK Module 7 on ‘Facilitation for Development’ for customization. AESA and BAEN jointly implemented the development of the customized module for Bangladesh. The process of customization consisted of five phases spread over a span of six months.
Undertaking Capacity Needs Assessment (CNA) is critical for organizing appropriate capacity development interventions. AESA organised four workshops on CNA of EAS in India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal with the following objectives.
1. Identify capacity gaps among EAS providers
2. Finalise a methodology for undertaking capacity needs assessment.
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.
This bcrochure describes the programme ""APRACA: Enhancing access of poor rural people to sustainable financial services through policy dialogue, capacity-building and knowledge-sharing in rural finance" that aimed to: enhanced the capacity of regional financial institutions in valuechain and renewableenergy financing, riskmanagement strategies, and microfinance for agriculture.
Esta obra se base en los conocimientos y las experiencias de un grupo de administradores y evaluadores de 12 organizaciones, tanto nacionales como internacionales, que llevaron a cabo una serie de estudios de evaluación en Bangadesh, Cuba, Ghana, Nicaragua, Filipinas y Vietnam.
African agriculture is currently at a crossroads, at which persistent food shortages are compounded by threats from climate change. But, as this book argues, Africa can feed itself in a generation and help contribute to global food security. To achieve this Africa has to define agriculture as a force in economic growth by: advancing scientific and technological research; investing in infrastructure; fostering higher technical training; and creating regional markets.
Innovation platforms (IPs) form a popular vehicle in agricultural research for development (AR4D) to facilitate stakeholder interaction, agenda setting, and collective action toward sustainable agricultural development. In this article, the authors analyze multilevel stakeholder engagement in fulfilling seven key innovation system functions. Data are gathered from experiences with interlinked community and (sub)national IPs established under a global AR4D program aimed at stimulating sustainable agricultural development in Central Africa.
The relationship between motivation and participation in five agricultural research and development innovation platforms (IPs) in Africa’s Great Lakes Region is examined. We analyze data from surveys and in-depth interviews, and focus group discussions. Although farmers prioritized new knowledge and skills, these were not sufficient to consistently foster active participation. Anticipated economic (markets, income, and credit) and material (agricultural inputs) livelihood benefits did encourage active farmer participation.