Pingali, Prabhu, Yves Bigot, and Hans P. Binswanger. Agricultural Mechanization and the Evolution of Farming Systems in Sub‐Saharan Africa . Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987, viii + 216 pp., $@@‐@@22.50

1988 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 498-499
Author(s):  
David Norman
Keyword(s):  
Farming Systems ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Agricultural Mechanization ◽  
Johns Hopkins University ◽  
Sub Saharan

scholarly journals Agricultural Mechanization and the Evolution of Farming Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa

1988 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Weiner ◽  
P. Pingali ◽  
Y. Bigot ◽  
H.P. Binswanger
Keyword(s):  
Farming Systems ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Agricultural Mechanization ◽  
Sub Saharan

scholarly journals Circular Bioeconomy Research for Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: Innovations, Gaps, and Actions

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 1926 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiferaw Feleke ◽  
Steven Michael Cole ◽  
Haruna Sekabira ◽  
Rousseau Djouaka ◽  
Victor Manyong
Keyword(s):  
Gap Analysis ◽  
Farming Systems ◽  
Crop Productivity ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
International Institute ◽  
The Public ◽  
Secondary Sources ◽  
Use Efficiency ◽  
Sub Saharan

The International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) has applied the concept of ‘circular bioeconomy’ to design solutions to address the degradation of natural resources, nutrient-depleted farming systems, hunger, and poverty in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Over the past decade, IITA has implemented ten circular bioeconomy focused research for development (R4D) interventions in several countries in the region. This article aims to assess the contributions of IITA’s circular bioeconomy focused innovations towards economic, social, and environmental outcomes using the outcome tracking approach, and identify areas for strengthening existing circular bioeconomy R4D interventions using the gap analysis method. Data used for the study came from secondary sources available in the public domain. Results indicate that IITA’s circular bioeconomy interventions led to ten technological innovations (bio-products) that translated into five economic, social, and environmental outcomes, including crop productivity, food security, resource use efficiency, job creation, and reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Our gap analysis identified eight gaps leading to a portfolio of five actions needed to enhance the role of circular bioeconomy in SSA. The results showcase the utility of integrating a circular bioeconomy approach in R4D work, especially how using such an approach can lead to significant economic, social, and environmental outcomes. The evidence presented can help inform the development of a framework to guide circular bioeconomy R4D at IITA and other research institutes working in SSA. Generating a body of evidence on what works, including the institutional factors that create enabling environments for circular bioeconomy approaches to thrive, is necessary for governments and donors to support circular bioeconomy research that will help solve some of the most pressing challenges in SSA as populations grow and generate more waste, thus exacerbating a changing climate using the linear economy model.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document