This brief puts the focus on the postharvest (PH) losses in Mozambique. According to the authors the glaring lack of data loss for major food commodities in Mozambique should move the government, development agencies, donors and research institutions to invest more on rigorous and systematic field-based studies to assess losses, and to identify matching loss mitigation innovations. The authors also assert that building local capacity and strengthening policy on PH will be of essence.
This report elaborates on how to use the agricultural knowledge and innovation systems framework to promote innovation at different levels with special focus on European issues related to the implementation of Horizon 2020. It is of value as a conceptual and methodological reference regarding the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS).
Innovation is an important challenge for European agriculture, but little is known about the performance of the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS). This report contributes towards this knowledge, as it reports on experiences from different countries and regions. The systems are very different between countries, regions and sectors.
L’agriculture familiale est le modèle d’exploitation le plus répandu en Europe. À ce titre, elle assure depuis des siècles la prospérité du secteur. L’ambitieux cadre stratégique mis en place par l’Union européenne a été conçu pour tenir compte des différents modèles d’agriculture qui coexistent sur son territoire, en ce compris les divers types d’agriculture familiale.
This paper offers a perspective on the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System. The first chapter gives an introduction to the subject and explains the role of SCAR and of the Strategic Working Group AKIS. The second chapter investigates the AKIS and their role in innovation, including the policy context of the European Innovation Partnership “Agricultural productivity and sustainability”. Chapter 3 discusses the relation in a globalised world between Agricultural Research (AR) and Agricultural Research for Development (ARD).
This review aims to introduce the institutional and policy oriented literature on technological innovation into the context of post harvest engineering. The focus is how rigorous quality and food safety standards in cross-border agricultural and horticultural trade influence technological change up stream in the agri-food chain. The review presents a selection of literature that considers technological innovation as a process, with a specific focus on the enabling and constraining institutional conditions found in developing countries.
This guide is organized into six chapters with a summary of key steps at the end of each chapter which can be considered as main highlights. Chapter one gives an introduction and an overview of the sequence of the main agricultural research and extension approaches and their shortcomings and hence the reason for the new innovation systems approaches. Chapter two deals with an overview of the InP process covering underlying values and principles, design and processes.
This Economic and Sector Work paper, “Enhancing Agricultural Innovation: How to Go Beyond the Strengthening of Research Systems,” was initiated as a result of the international workshop, “Development of Research Systems to Support the Changing Agricultural Sector,” organized by the Agriculture and Rural Development Department of the World Bank in June 2004 in Washington, DC.
This paper is a contribution to the establishment of a new capacity development (CD) 9 strategy, a process that the Consortium Office will facilitate, with external input, during 2013. The paper explores the lessons learned from CGIAR’s experience with CD and reflects the findings of a working group that was brought together in late 2012. The objective of the paper is to identify the roles that individual and institutional CD might play in CGIAR in order to increase CGIAR’s impact on the welfare of smallholder farmers and the sustainability of their farming systems.
This paper captures lessons from recent experiences on using ‘theories of change’ amongst organisations involved in the research–policy interface. The literature in this area highlights much of the complexity inherent in the policymaking process, as well as the challenges around finding meaningful ways to measure research uptake. As a tool, ‘theories of change’ offers much, but the paper argues that the very complexity and dynamism of the research-to-policy process means that any theory of change will be inadequate in this context.