This paper represents a guidance to USAID on elements to incorporate into a strategy to improve agricultural research, and a technical brief to guide USAID investments in NARS strengthening. The paper is the final output from a one-day Roundtable which was held on March 5, 2013 and that brought together some 30 specialists in agricultural research and agricultural research systems to discuss which USAID interventions would best strengthen NARS in developing countries.

The authors aimed at knowing how different learning methods, such as video shows and workshops, change farmers’ knowledge, attitudes and practices about botanical pesticides. This paper explains how video engages men and women farmers in spreading botanical pesticides across 12 villages in Bogra District, north-western Bangladesh.The authors conducted ex ante and ex post surveys among farmers from November 2009 to September 2010. For data analysis, the authors used t-test and McNemer and Wilcoxon sign rank tests.

This publication is a product of learning and sharing events supported by IFAD and its partner institutions. Presented in this publication are nine cases of development innovations selected from the IFAD country programme in the Philippines. These cases, selected and largely written by practitioners based on their experiences, reflect scaling up initiatives at different stages of maturity. 

This learning module on Applying innovation system concept in agricultural research for development has been prepared to serve as a tool in achieving the objective of strengthening the capacity of project staff and other researchers and actors who are believed to have a key role to play in ushering in market-led agricultural transformation. This includes national, regional, international and private sector agricultural researchers, university lecturers, and others engaged in biophysical as well as social science research.

This report is concerned with the ‘who?’ ‘what?’ and ‘how?’ of pro-poor extension. It builds on the analytical framework proposed in the Inception Report of the same study (Christoplos, Farrington and Kidd, 2001), taking it forward by fleshing out the analysis with empirical information gathered from several countries during the course of the study (from primary data in Bolivia, Colombia, Nicaragua, Uganda and Vietnam, and from secondary sources in a range of other countries, including India), and drawing conclusions on the scope for action by governments and donors in a range of contexts.

The question of how agricultural research can best be used for developmental purposes is a topic of some debate in developmental circles. The idea that this is simply a question of better transfer of ideas from research to farmers has been largely discredited. Agricultural innovation is a process that takes a multitude of different forms, and, within this process, agricultural research and expertise are mobilised at different points in time for different purposes. This paper uses two key analytical principles in order to find how research is actually put into use.

The book presents an overview of six research projects within the Knowledge Networking for Rural Development in Asia Pacific (ENRAP) research program. It asks if ICTs enabled farmers to sell beyond local markets and at better prices, and whether there have been social gains in linking geographically disparate households and social networks.

This paper reflects on the experience of the Research Into Use (RIU) projects in Asia. It reconfirms much of what has been known for many years about the way innovation takes place and finds that many of the shortcomings of RIU in Asia were precisely because lessons from previous research on agricultural innovation were “not put into use” in the programme’s implementation. However, the experience provides three important lessons for donors and governments to make use of agricultural research: (i) Promoting research into use requires enabling innovation.

Grant funds specifically targeted to smallholder farmers to facilitate innovation are a promising agricultural policy instrument. They stimulate smallholders to experiment with improved practices, and to engage with research, extension and business development services providers. However, evidence on impact and effectiveness of these grants is scarce. Partly, because attribution of changes in practices and performance to the grant alone is challenging, and the grant is often invested in innovation processes that benefitted from other support in the past.

Though research on communication and innovation during the last decade brought better understanding on the innovation process, this has not influenced the underlying paradigm and practice of Extension and Advisory Services (EAS) in most countries. At the same time there have been few initiatives that tried to experiment with new ways of developing capacities for extension and innovation.