Local banks, NGOs and public institutions worked closely to ensure that women could access loans, join associations and have their voices be heard in collective decision-making processes. It also allowed these women and their communities to make collective investments that would increase their production, stabilize and diversify their nutrition, and ultimately achieve a better life.
Geographic information system (GIS) data is often used to map socio-economic data with a spatial component. This data, which is obtained from multiple open-source databases, complements official statistics and generates additional spatial inputs to statistical and econometric analyses. IFAD uses impact assessments using data from face-to-face interviews in order to determine the impact of their projects on strategic goal and objectives. However, the COVID-19 pandemic meant these interviews could no longer take place.
The government of Rwanda is promoting agricultural intensification focused on the production of a small number of targeted commodities as a central strategy to pursue the joint policy goals of economic growth, food security and livelihood development. The dominant approach to increase the productive capacity of the land, crops and animal resources has been through large-scale land consolidation, soil fertility management, and the intensive use of biotechnology and external inputs.
Even prior to COVID, there was a considerable push for food system transformation to achieve better nutrition and health as well as environmental and climate change outcomes. Recent years have seen a large number of high visibility and influential publications on food system transformation. Literature is emerging questioning the utility and scope of these analyses, particularly in terms of trade-offs among multiple objectives.
The co-creation and sharing of knowledge among different types of actors with complementary expertise is known as the Multi-Actor Approach (MAA). This paper presents how Horizon2020 Thematic-Networks (TNs) deal with the MAA and put forward best practices during the different project phases, based on the results of a desktop study, interviews, surveys and expert workshops. The study shows that not all types of actors are equally involved in TN consortia and participatory activities, meaning TNs might be not sufficiently demand-driven and the uptake of the results is not optimal.
This study draws on social-psychology in an attempt to identify the various motivations for technology adoption (TA), including both economic and non-economic, and to gain insights into how and why Brazilian innovative beef farmers make decisions about whether or not to adopt particular technologies.
Since 2017, in line with COAG’s recommendation, the Research and Extension Unit engaged in the development of a participatory AIS assessment framework including a customizable toolbox for countries with a totally new capacity development perspective. The assessment framework is meant for actors of the national agricultural innovation systems, i.e.
In this blog, Bhuvana N and Aditya K S argue that to achieve sustainable transformation of global food systems, there is a need to promote systems thinking at all levels, research, extension, education and policy.
Extension and advisory services (EAS) play a key role in facilitating innovation for sustainable agricultural development. To strengthen this role, appropriate investment and conducive policies are needed in EAS, guided by evidence. It is therefore essential to examine EAS characteristics and performance in the context of modern, pluralistic and increasingly digital EAS systems. In response to this need, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has developed guidelines and instruments for the systematic assessment of national EAS systems.
Extension and advisory services (EAS) play a key role in facilitating innovation processes, empowering marginalized groups through capacity development, and linking farmers with markets. EAS are increasingly provided by a range of actors and funded from diverse sources. With the broadened scope of EAS and the growing complexity of the system, the quantitative performance indicators used in the past (for example related to investment, staffing or productivity) are no longer adequate to assess the performance of EAS systems.