Early applications of the innovation systems framework to developing-country agriculture suggest opportunities for more intensive and extensive analysis. There is ample scope for empirical studies to make greater use of the theoretical content available in the literature, and to employ more diverse methodologies, both qualitative and quantitative. Further, there is room to improve the relevance of empirical studies to the analysis of public policies that support science, technology, and innovation, as well as to policies that promote poverty reduction and economic growth.

This paper explores the application of the innovation systems framework to the design and construction of national agricultural innovation indicators. Optimally, these indicators could be used to gauge and benchmark national performance in developing more responsive, dynamic, and innovative agricultural sectors in developing countries.

Ethiopian agriculture is changing as new actors, relationships, and policies influence the ways in which small-scale, resource-poor farmers access and use information and knowledge in their agricultural production decisions. Although these changes suggest new opportunities for smallholders, too little is known about how changes will ultimately improve the wellbeing of smallholders in Ethiopia. The authors of this paper examine whether these changes are improving the ability of smallholders to innovate and thus improve their own welfare.

The article provides a conceptual framework and discusses research methods for analyzing pluralistic agricultural advisory services. The framework can also assist policy-makers in identifying reform options. It addresses the following question: Which forms of providing and financing agricultural advisory services work best in which situation? The framework ‘disentangles’ agricultural advisory services by distinguishing between (1) governance structures, (2) capacity, (3) management, and (4) advisory methods.

Although it is not always acknowledged, power differences between partners fundamentally affect Agricultural Research for Development (ARD) partnerships. In referring to its African-European ARD partnerships, PAEPARD has often alluded to aspects of power without naming them as such. The project was established to create “equitable and balanced partnerships” between: a) researchers and research users, and b) African and European partners.

Inclusion is a key issue for Agricultural Research for Development (ARD). Development goals in and of themselves call for better livelihoods and opportunities for the less privileged actors working in agriculture. They also call for greater equity and balanced representation of the population at an institutional level. This brief focuses on how ARD processes can more sensitively address gender relations and youth issues. Women and young people have distinctive needs and interests which can be less visible within broader “Producer Organizations”, for example.

The term 'Integrated Agricultural Research for Development (IAR4D),' first coined in 2003, acknowledges the complexity of the agricultural system and the need to bring together not only different related research disciplines but also multiple actors (private sector, public sector, producer organisation and policymakers) to find joint solutions to the challenges of agricultural innovation. The book is produced in response traces the evolution of the concept back to its roots in an impressive range of theories and approaches from diverse disciplines, such as constructivism, participatory acti

This paper presents the common framework on CD for AIS developed by TAP and points to the relevance of meta-learning and the importance of “functional capacities”, if higher education institutions and their graduates are to become active players in the agricultural innovation system. The Framework was developed through an inclusive, participatory and multi-stakeholders approach with contributions by TAP Partners, including FARA and the Global Conference on Higher Education and Research in Agriculture.

This paper examines the role of postsecondary agricultural education and training (AET) in sub-Saharan Africa in the context of the region’s agricultural innovation systems. Specifically, the paper looks at how AET in sub-Saharan Africa can contribute to agricultural development by strengthening innovative capacity, or the ability of individuals and organisations to introduce new products and processes that are socially or economically relevant, particularly with respect to smallholder farmers who represent the largest group of agricultural producers in the region.

The paper takes a critical look at two key interventions identified to deliver the PAEPARD capacity strengthening strategy. Firstly, the training of a pool of agricultural innovation facilitators (AIF) to broker relations between relevant stakeholders for the consolidation of effective consortia. PAEPARD envisaged the role of AIF as to support both the face-to-face and virtual (via skype, email or social media) engagement of partners in capacity strengthening processes.