This paper presents the processes, general guidelines lessons and experiences pertaining to “good practices” for organizing and forming Agricultural Innovation Platforms in the Lake Kivu Pilot Learning Site, covering three countries (Uganda, Rwanda and Democratic Republic of Congo) with widely differing social political environments to address agricultural development challenges.
This paper examines how the different institutional innovations arising from various permutations of linkages and interactions of ARD organizations (national, international advanced agricultural research centres and universities) influenced the different outcomes in addressing identified ARD problems.
Policy processes are formal and informal negotiations in which heterogeneous groups of stakeholders seek to influence policy agenda setting and the development and implementation of policy. Innovation platforms can help balance the vested interests of market actors, civil society and other stakeholders to support policy processes. They can bring together different types of expertise, experience and interests, and facilitate learning between policymakers and market and civil society actors to develop negotiated and implementable policies and regulations.
One of the most important things that innovation platforms do is to build the capacity of their members to innovate. Some key elements of innovation capacity include: self-organization, learning new skills, changing mindsets, valuing others’ roles in innovation, having a holistic view, being able to adapt to changing situations, creating new ideas, recognizing opportunities, being proactive, using indigenous ideas, and looking to the future. This brief uses the analogy of a traditional African cooking pot to explain how innovation capacity is developed within an innovation platform.
Between 2012 and 2016, in collaboration with research and development partners, ILRI undertook specific action research and capacity development interventions to address identified challenges and generate evidence for wider applicability along the pig value chain. The work was funded by three major bilateral donors, the European Commission/International Fund for Agricultural Development (EC/IFAD) and Irish Aid.
The gender strategy of the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish highlights the key role of gender analysis in livestock value chain research and guides the integration and implementation of related research activities. The Program’s gender team has produced a gender capacity assessment tool to evaluate existing skills and gaps in partners’ gender capacities and identify measures to address them. In 2015, the tool was implemented in four L&F value chain countries (Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Tanzania and Uganda).
This report highlights the outcome of the Business and Enterprise training workshop conducted for pig farmers under the Kyanamukaaka-Kabonera pig cooperative in Masaka district. The training took place from 26th to 28th August 2015 at St.Paul Primary School in Bukunda, Masaka district. The report contains information about workshop preparations, objectives, methodology, key events of the training, participants’ evaluation of the workshop, summary of conclusion and recommendations. The training team comprised of Enterprise Uganda staff; Daniel Joloba and Sarah Akiteng.
The capacities of twenty-four Livestock and Fish CGIAR Research Programme partners in four countries (Ethiopia, Uganda, Tanzania and Nicaragua), representing two partner types (development and research), have been assessed during the period December 2014 – September 2015. This report aims to summarize these four assessments, analyze the differences and similarities, and present recommendations for the design of capacity development interventions.
This presentation describes the process of the capacity needs assesment carried out by a consortium of organizations in Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Tanzania, Tunisia and Uganda. Starts describing the the methodology used for the assesment, then present the key finds and in the end gives some recommendations
This paper discusses a range of approaches and benchmarks that can guide future design of value chain impact evaluations. Twenty studies were reviewed to understand the status and direction of value chain impact evaluations. A majority of the studies focus on evaluating the impact of only a few interventions, at several levels within the value chains. Few impact evaluations are based on well-constructed, well-conceived comparison groups. Most of them rely on use of propensity score matching to construct counterfactual groups and estimate treatment effects.