The Applied Research and Innovation Systems in Agriculture project (ARISA) started in December 2014 with the aim of increasing net farm income for 10,000 smallholder farming households in eastern Indonesia. The project was designed to address a key challenge in agricultural research for development: how to ensure that proven research outputs1 are available and accessible for use in farming communities.

This brief discusses the emergence of Asia as a hotpot of innovation and the implications for Australia's own innovation capacity

This paper reflects on the experiences of the Applied Research and Innovation Systems in Agriculture (ARISA) project to caralyse agricultural innovation by bringing RIs and private sector (PS) actors together in partnerships. Facilitating partnerships to caralyse innovation requires capacity building of individuals as well as institutional change. This paper examines the approaches to parnering for innovation, successes, challenges and lessons learned

This paper aims to map the experience of the RIU Asia projects and draw out the main innovation management tactics being observed while laying the groundwork for further research on this topic. It provides a framework to help analyse the sorts of innovation management tasks that are becoming important. This framework distinguishes four elements of innovation management: (i) Functions (ii) Actions (iii) Toolsand (iv) Organisational Format.

The study explored the nature of innovation response capacity and the building of policy-relevant innovation capacity in the context of livestock-related emergencies in East Africa.

This note presents an outline of the main strands of the innovation systems research associated with the ARISA project. It begins by locating this in the current discourse on concepts and policy perspectives on innovation and capacity building before setting out key areas of research inquiry and research activities

A central concern about achieving global food security is reconfiguring agri-food systems towards sustainability. However, historically-informed trajectories of agri-food system development remain resistant to a change in direction. Through a systematic literature review, the authors identify three research domains exploring this phenomenon and six explanations of resistance: embedded nature of technologies, misaligned institutional settings, individual attitudes, political economy factors, infrastructural rigidities, research and innovation priorities.

Globalization, urbanization and new market demands - together with ever-increasing quality and safety requirements - are putting significantly greater pressures on agrifood stakeholders in the world. The ability to respond to new challenges and opportunities is important not just for producers but also for industries in developing countries. This paper aims to present what "innovation response capacity" entails, especially for natural resourcebased industries in a developing country context.

There are divergent views on what capacity development might mean in relation to agricultural biotechnology. The core of this debate is whether this should involve the development of human capital and research infrastructure, or whether it should encompass a wider range of activities which also include developing the capacity to use knowledge productively. This paper uses the innovation systems concept to shed light on this discussion, arguing that it is innovation capacity rather than science and technology capacity that has to be developed.