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.
Le semis direct est un système de production fondé sur le non-travail du sol. Il intègre une série de pratiques agricoles qui permettent de protéger les sols cultivés de l’érosion, de réduire les consommations de carburants, voire d’augmenter les rendements. Le large succès du semis direct au Brésil, contribue à la compétitivité et à la forte croissance de ses productions tout en préservant les sols. Le système complet du semis direct sous couvert est fondé sur trois principes : le non-labour, la couverture permanente du sol et des rotations culturales.
Au Brésil, la diffusion du modèle de gestion intégrée des ressources en eau varie fortement selon l’environnement socio-territorial. Le Sud présente un dynamisme certain s’appuyant sur des initiatives locales. Les acteurs locaux sont organisés en comité de bassin et développent des actions pour améliorer la gestion des ressources. Dans le Nordeste, la marche vers ces nouveaux modes de gestion paraît difficile tant les inerties sociales et culturelles freinent un partage réel du pouvoir, des ressources et des coûts.