The Farmer Field School (FFS) approach has been very successful and witnessed a strong expansion in many areas beyond crop production. Notwithstanding this success, the adoption of FFS in national extension often remains problematic and FFS activities have often been implemented in the margin of national institutions with strong reliance on donor funding. The creation of an enabling environment for institutional support is essential for expanding the effort, improving quality, and strengthening impact and continuity of the FFSs.

The importance of agriculture to Mongolia’s economy, and to its rural economy in particular, makes sustainable agricultural development a national priority. The transition from collective socialism to a market economy in the 1990s nearly caused the collapse of the entire agriculture sector. Since privatization, the number of livestock animals, mainly sheep and goats, has increased dramatically, reaching 45.1 million in 2012. This growth in both livestock and crop production was enabled by several factors. Yet investment in research and extension remains very low.

Following their first formation in Indonesia over 25 years ago, Farmer Field Schools (FFS) have served as a “proof of concept” of how transformative learning can help governments, donors and development stakeholders achieve development objectives. The FFS approach, which has now been used in more than 90 countries by more than 12 million small farmers (FAO, 2016), not only creates a space in which the practical needs of smallholders to solve production-related issues can be addressed but also fosters personal and community-level transformation through empowerment.

Connecting science with policy has always been challenging for both scientists and policy makers. In Ghana, Mali and Senegal, multi-stakeholder national science-policy dialogue platforms on climate-smart agriculture (CSA) were setup to use scientificevidence to create awareness of climate change impacts on agriculture andadvocate for the mainstreaming of climate change and CSA into agriculturaldevelopment plans.

This paper was synthesized from several scholarly literature and aimed at providing up-to-date information on climate change impacts, adaptation strategies, policies and institutional mechanisms that each agriculture subsector had put in place in dealing with climate change and its related issues in West Africa. For each subsector (crop, fishery and livestock), the current status, climate change impacts, mitigation and adaption strategies have been analyzed

Recently, a new approach to extension and climate information services, namely Participatory Integrated Climate Services for Agriculture (PICSA) has been developed. PICSA makes use of historical climate records, participatory decision-making tools and forecasts to help farmers identify and better plan livelihood options that are suited to local climate features and farmers’ own circumstances.

Participatory action research (PAR) has been around for years, and can add significant value to agriculture research for development projects. The use of PAR in climate-smart villages (CSVs) is no different. This review aimed to assess the impact that PAR approaches had on the adoption of CSA practices and technologies, with an emphasis on gender and social inclusion. Through a portfolio review, interviews with regional CSV teams, and surveys sent to local partners, this report demonstrates the benefit of PAR use in the implementation of the CSV approach.