Ce texte présente les premiers résultats d’une étude sur la contribution de groupes d’agriculteurs familiaux aux processus d’innovation dans trois municipes de la Paraíba (Brésil). L’objectif consistait à identifier le rôle des producteurs et de leurs organisations en matière d’introduction et d’adaptation de techniques agricoles.
Le gouvernement de Lula a considérablement amplifié et diversifié le Programme d’Appui à l’Agriculture Familiale (PRONAF), créé par le gouvernement Fernando Henrique Cardoso en 1995. Ce choix affirmé sur la longue durée pour l’agriculture familiale, peut surprendre dans un Brésil qui a toujours, tout au long de son histoire, privilégié l’agriculture « d’entreprise » : latifundia et entreprises agricoles.
El estudio buscó caracterizar dos elementos complementarios en el subcontinente latinoamericano: i) el surgimiento de políticas públicas específicas para el sector de la AF, y ii) la forma en que las políticas agrarias clásicas afectan ese sector. El documento consta de dos partes. La primera presenta un análisis transversal del conjunto de estudios de caso nacionales y la segunda parte presenta dichos estudios. Los trabajos de síntesis nacional fueron realizados a partir de la aplicación de una guía de análisis común que comportaba cinco bloques: 1.
La obra que nos complace presentar reúne un conjunto de estudios de caso y un análisis transversal de las políticas públicas para la agricultura familiar en once países latinoamericanos, complementados por un ensayo interpretativo acerca de las implicaciones para políticas públicas derivadas de los principales eventos internacionales del Año Internacional de la Agricultura Familiar en América Latina.
This paper discusses innovation in low and middle-income countries, focusing on the role it has played in local and national responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the lessons from this effort for how innovation might be harnessed to address wider development and humanitarian challenges by mobilising resources, improving processes, catalysing collaboration and encouraging creative and contextually grounded approaches. The paper also examines how international development and humanitarian organisations can improve their support for local and national innovation efforts.
One-fifth of the innovative solutions to fight the Covid-19 pandemic have emerged from low and middle-income countries, and these responses offer promising insights for how we think about, manage, and enable innovation. As the international community now faces the historic challenge of vaccinating the world, more attention and resources must be directed to the innovators who are developing technically novel, contextually relevant, and socially inclusive alternatives to mainstream innovation management practices.
Addressing 21st century development challenges requires investments in innovation, including the use of new approaches and technologies. Currently, many development organisations prioritise investments in isolated innovation pilots that leverage a specific approach or technology rather than pursuing a strategic approach to expand the organisation's toolbox with innovations that have proven their comparative advantage over what is currently used.
How do innovations move from the edges to the core of what an organization does? For maximum impact, innovations must cease to be innovative and become institutionalized and normalized.
Innovation portfolio management enables not only commercial actors but also public sector organisations to systematically manage and prioritise innovation activities according to concurrent and diverse purposes and priorities. It is a core component of a comprehensive approach to innovation management and a condition to assess the social return of investment across an entire portfolio. The OECD Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) has worked in this space for a number of years.
For most development organisations and funders, innovation remains a sprawling collection of activities, often energetic, but largely uncoordinated. To a dregree, this has also been the case for Iceland's development co-operation. Iceland, a comparatively small but energetic player in the international development co-operation system, provided the equivalent of 0.28% (roughly 67 million Euro) of it 2021 gross national income towards Official Development Assistance.