EXPERIENCES FROM FRANCE (CIRAD AND INRA)

ALIGNING AR AND ARD

DO AR AND ARD MORE OFTEN ADDRESS SIMILAR CHALLENGES AND

USE SIMILAR METHODS ??Mostly but not always (AR tends to be more academic/ ARD more finalised; concern for poverty and inequality is stronger in ARD; implication of non research partners more frequent in ARD)

Has this had consequences for the way your government:• sets the research agendas for AR and ARD? yes. Different research agendas• organises / distributes the funding ? yes. Distinct funding for Cirad versus for Inra (+ ANR not funding ARD)• organises the research (e.g. by promoting collaboration / integration between institutes)? Growing coordination between Inra and Cirad on international and global issues (ex joint research strategy in the MED)

INNOVATION PARTNERSHIP APPROACHES TO CONNECT LOCAL INNOVATION AND GLOBAL CHALL.

Do you see differences on how this is organised in AR (e.g. with Rural Development / Structural Funds) and in ARD ?Differences : Dvping countries lack technical institutes (existing in Europe) and farmers do not receive incentives/subsidies: there is a higher need to address the pb of risk and the lack of innovation brokers

Does more alignment make sense?The IEP principle of joining research funds and structural funds can also be applied in dvping countries (WB, DEVCO, NEPAD: structural ; FARA, MESR, RTD,,,: STI)

Are there interesting relevant examples / developments to report from your country?See recommendations from JOLISAA project