Agricultural research continues to be a good investment. The studies show that investments in international and national agricultural research account for almost all of the total factor productivity (TFP) growth in SSA and large shares of agricultural growth globally. The existing agricultural research institutions have, on average, delivered rates of return to public investment above 30-40%, which is much higher than the 5-10% available to other public investments or the 2-5% cost of borrowing public funds.
Agricultural Innovation System (AIS) is a collection of institutions enabling agricultural and food system transformation in a country. Any attempt to engage in emergency interventions by institutions and bounce back with higher levels of resilience requires strong organizational and human capacity as a prerequisite. What role do these institutions play in emergencies such as COVID-19 and how can they bounce back after such a crisis is over? What can be done to help these institutions build resilience capacity for such recovery?
The Conceptual Background provides an in-depth analysis of the conceptual underpinnings and principles of the TAP Common Framework. It is also available in French and Spanish.
Le volume «Fondements conceptuels» illustre les fondements conceptuels sous-tendant l’approche et l’opérationnalisation du renforcement des capacités (RC) des systèmes d'innovation agricole (SIA).
L'objectif du Cadre Commun de la TAP est de promouvoir une meilleure cohérence et un impact plus fort du RC en soutien aux SIA sous les tropiques. Développé en 2015 à travers un processus hautement participatif, il a été convenu que le Cadre devrait fournir des bases conceptuelles et des indications pratiques.
Los Antecedentes Conceptuales proporcionan un análisis detallado de los fundamentos conceptuales y principios del Marco Común de la TAP.
El objetivo del Marco Común de la TAP es promover una mayor coherencia y un mayor impacto del desarrollo de capacidades en apoyo a la innovación agrícola en los trópicos. El Marco Común fue desarrollado en el 2015 a través de un proceso altamente participativo, en el cual se acordó que el Marco debería proporcionar las bases conceptuales y una guía operativa.
This paper asks: What have been the impacts of farmer- or community-led (informal) processes of research and development in agriculture and natural resource management in terms of food security, ecological sustainability, economic empowerment, gender relations, local capacity to innovate and influence on formal agricultural research and development institutions?
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 Guidance Note on Operationalization provides a brief recap of the conceptual underpinnings and principles of the TAP Common Framework as well as a more detailed guide to operationalization of the proposed dual pathways approach. It offers also a strategy for monitoring and evaluation as well as a toolbox of select tools that may be useful at the different stages of the CD for AIS cycle.
This paper has been prepared under the guidelines provided by the TAP Secretariat at the FAO, as a contribution to the G20 initiative TAP, which includes near 40 partners and is facilitated by FAO. Its purpose is to provide a Regional synthesis report on capacity needs assessment for agricultural innovation, with capacity gaps identified and analyzed, including recommendations to strengthen agricultural innovation systems (AIS) and draft policy recommendations to address the capacity gaps.
In this paper, results from a study on the use of improved coffee production technology schemes among smallholder coffee producers in three prominent coffee producing regions in Honduras are presented. The impact of various schemes (trajectories) in which different agents influence the producers’ decision to use new technologies was analyzed. In particular, there are differences in the influence of a) private coffee buying organizations and b) government and public development agencies on the innovation behavior of coffee growers.