The Digitalisation of African Agriculture Report 2018-2019

An inclusive, digitally-enabled agricultural transformation could help achieve meaningful livelihood improvements for Africa’s smallholder farmers and pastoralists. It could drive greater engagement in agriculture from women and youth and create employment opportunities along the value chain. At CTA we staked a claim on this power of digitalisation to more systematically transform agriculture early on. Digitalisation, focusing on not individual ICTs but the application of these technologies to entire value chains, is a theme that cuts across all of our work. In youth entrepreneurship, we are fostering a new breed of young ICT ‘agripreneurs’. In climate-smart agriculture multiple projects provide information that can help towards building resilience for smallholder farmers. And in women empowerment we are supporting digital platforms to drive greater inclusion for women entrepreneurs in agricultural value chains

Review of agricultural production systems in eastern Africa in relation to food and nutrition security and climate change

The goal of this paper is to provide a unified resource for Eritrea, Djibouti, Somaliland, Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania. For each country the review covers the topics of livestock production systems and agroecological zones, food and nutrition security, climate change, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate-smart agriculture (CSA) with a focus on the role of, or impact on, livestock systems. Each of these topics is broad and many excellent studies and reviews have been produced covering these topics either at the country level or for the entire East Africa region. It is the goal of this paper to provide an accessible introduction to these topics and to direct readers to the resources that exist for gathering detailed information on livestock production, food nutrition and security, climate change, GHG emissions and climate-smart livestock production in each country

Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach

Maize, the second most globally important staple crop after wheat, originated in Mexico, where it is typically grown as part of a set of associated crops and practices called the milpa system. This ancient mode of production is practiced today in ways that vary by cultural context and agro-environment. Milpas generate private economic value, in terms of food security, diet quality and livelihoods, for the twomillion farm households who manage them. Furthermore, milpas generate public economic value by conserving agrobiodiversity, especially that of maize landraces, which have the potential to contribute unique traits needed by plant breeders for future crop improvement. In this way, milpas contribute to global food security in maize. However, the sustainability of the milpa system has been threatened by offfarm employment opportunities, long-distance migration, the increasing commercialization and intensification of maize production. Most recently, the milpa system has been negatively impacted by the contamination of maize landraces by genetically modified (GM) maize, cultivation of which is currently prohibited in Mexico. Here, we employ a choice experiment to estimate Mexican farmers’ valuation of three components of agrobiodiversity (crop species richness, maize variety richness and maize landraces), and examine their interest in cultivating GM maize. Choice experiment data, household level social, economic and demographic data, community level economic development data, and information on milpa production characteristics, and farmers’ attitudes and perceptions with regards to GM food and crops were collected from 420 farm households across 17 communities in three states of Mexico. Using these data, we analyzed the heterogeneity of farmer preferences using a latent class model, which can be used to simultaneously identify sample segments having homogenous preferences for milpa attributes, as well as farmer characteristics affecting preferences. We further identified the characteristics of farmers who are most likely to continue growing maize landraces and managing milpa systems, as well as those least likely to accept GM maize. Specifically, we identified three distinct segments of farmers: (i) Landrace Conservationists derive the highest private economic value from continued management of landraces and the highest economic loss from the possible adoption of GM maize. These farmers are young, dislike GM foods and crops, and are mainly located at the Oaxaca site, where transgenic constructs have been found in maize landraces. (ii) Milpa Diversity Managers derive the highest economic value from managing all of the agrobiodiversity components of the milpa, and suffer fewer losses from management of GM maize. These are older farmers, who are curious and like to experiment with maize varieties. (iii) Marginalized Maize Producers derive little value from crop species and maize variety richness, receive minimal value from maize landraces, and also experience the smallest negative impact from the adoption of GM maize. These farmers are located in the most isolated communities, have the lowest level of productivity, and oversee the largest milpa areas. They are also the most tightly integrated into the maize output markets. These novel findings have implications for debates concerning the adoption of GM maize in Mexico and its associated costs and benefits, as well as for the design of targeted, cost-effective conservation programs on farms

Gender in Agriculture Sourcebook

The purpose of the Sourcebook is to act as a guide for practitioners and technical staff in addressing gender issues and integrating gender-responsive actions in the design and implementation of agricultural projects and programs. It speaks not with gender specialists on how to improve their skills but rather reaches out to technical experts to guide them in thinking through how to integrate gender dimensions into their operations. The Sourcebook aims to deliver practical advice, guidelines, principles, and descriptions and illustrations of approaches that have worked so far to achieve the goal of effective gender mainstreaming in the agricultural operations of development agencies. It captures and expands the main messages of the World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development and is considered an important tool to facilitate the operationalization and implementation of the report's key principles on gender equality and women's empowerment

Final Report-Workshop on Experiences and Options for Priority Setting in NARS, August 12-16, 1996, Nairobi, Kenya

The motivation for this workshop came from two sources. First, under a project funded by USAID (AFR/SD/PSGE/TDT Office), Michigan State University (MSU) has been carrying out various activities to assist African national agricultural research systems (NARS) and regional organizations to improve their capacity for strategic agricultural research planning, including technology assessment and priority setting within a commodity sector framework. Second, recent collaborative work by the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) and the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) has focused on the development of a process and methods for program-level priority setting. The objectives of the workshop were (1) to provide a forum for ASARECA member NARS to synthesize their experiences with institute and program-level priority setting and technology assessment; (2) to examine the process and methods developed by KARI/ISNAR and other NARS in commodity program planning; and (3) to develop country-specific frameworks and action plans for a priority-setting/technology assessment study in a focus program area, to be carried out beginning in late 1996.food security, food policy, Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies, Downloads July 2008 - June 2009: 11, F0,

Managing Intellectual Property to Foster Agricultural Development

Over the past decades, consideration of IPRs has become increasingly important in many areas of agricultural development, including foreign direct investment, technology transfer, trade, investment in innovation, access to genetic resources, and the protection of traditional knowledge. The widening role of IPRs in governing the ownership of—and access to—innovation, information, and knowledge makes them particularly critical in ensuring that developing countries benefit from the introduction of new technologies that could radically alter the welfare of the poor. Failing to improve IPR policies and practices to support the needs of developing countries will eliminate significant development opportunities. The discussion in this note moves away from policy prescriptions to focus on investments to improve how IPRs are used in practice in agricultural development. These investments must be seen as complementary to other investments in agricultural development. IPRs are woven into the context of innovation and R&D. They can enable entrepreneurship and allow the leveraging of private resources for resolving the problems of poverty. Conversely, IPRs issues can delay important scientific advancements, deter investment in products for the poor, and impose crippling transaction costs on organizations if the wrong tools are used or tools are badly applied. The central benefit of pursuing the investments outlined in this note is to build into the system a more robust capacity for strategic and flexible use of IPRs tailored to development goals

CCAFS Program of Work and Budget 2016

The 2016 program of work and budget of the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) lays out the key activities and budget in 2016

‘CSA-Plan’: strategies to put Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) into practice

Large-scale investment is needed to create climate-smart agriculture (CSA) systems. While many government and development agencies are integrating CSA into their policies, programmes, plans and projects, there is little guidance for operational planning and implementation on ways to be climate-smart. Here we present ‘CSA-Plan’. CSA-Plan frames actions needed to design and execute CSA programmes into four components – (i) situation analysis, (ii) targeting and prioritising, (iii) programme design, and (iv) monitoring and evaluation. Each component yields concrete information to operationalise CSA development, separating it from traditional agriculture development. Already, CSA-Plan has shown the capacity to change the discussion around CSA implementation. With iterative co-development, the approaches will become ever more useful, relevant and legitimate to governments, civil society and the private sector alike