This paper illustrates already practiced models and strategies of high impact innovations around the world with particular respect to India. The shown examples of innovative businesses were selected based on four criteria reflecting their innovative character. Firstly, innovations need to fulfil a value for the life of people which exceeds the mere use of the product. Secondly, it requires good quality products or service for an affordable price even for lower income groups.

Grants for agricultural innovation are common but grant funds specifically targeted to smallholder farmers remain relatively rare. Nevertheless, they are receiving increasing recognition as a promising venue for agricultural innovation. They stimulate smallholders to experiment with improved practices, to become proactive and to engage with research and extension providers. The systematic review covered three modalities of disbursing these grants to smallholder farmers and their organisations: vouchers, competitive grants and farmer-led innovation support funds.

This flyer summarizes the key-findings from the e-conference (19 April-13 May 2016) and the international symposium (21 June 2016) both organized by the Tropical Agriculture Platform (TAP) and supported by the United States in the framework of the USA-Brazil agreement to promote, via TAP, the implementation of the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development. The agreement pays particular attention to innovation system for food security, nutrition and sustainable agriculture.

The project “Strengthening Community Resilience to Change: Combining Local Innovative Capacity with Scientific Research” (CLIC–SR), supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, was completed on 31 August 2016. During the four years since 2012, the Prolinnova Country Platforms in Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda made large strides in:

Technological innovations have driven economic development and improvement in living conditions throughout history. However, the majority of smallholder farmers in sub‐Saharan Africa have seldom adopted or used science‐based technological innovations. Consequently, several scholars have been persistently questioning the effectiveness of intervention models in smallholder agriculture.

The capacity of existing monitoring and decision making tools in generating evidence about the performance of R4D with multi-stakeholder processes, such as innovation platforms (IPs), public private partnerships (PPP), participatory value chain management (PVCM) is very limited. Results of these tools are either contextual and qualitative such as case studies that can not be used by other R4D interventions or quantitative i.e. impact assessments that do not inform what works in R4D.

The citizens of Lesotho rely on a complex web of livelihood strategies made primarily of family kinships and strong community networks. Recently, community breakdowns have occurred because of extensive land degradation, soil erosion, widespread poverty, and HIV/AIDs. This thesis focuses on two aspects which are likely to help decrease the problems earlier stated.

A growing variety of public and private rural advisory services are available today, leading to increasingly “pluralistic service systems” (PSS), in which advisory services are provided by different actors and funded from different sources. However, these PSS and the way they operate are still poorly understood. In particular, how PSS can effectively respond to demands of heterogeneous farmers in contexts where small-scale agriculture increasingly needs to exploit value addition and adapt to market requirements.