This project aimed to accelerate the adoption of Zero-Till seed drills (including the Happy Seeder) to reduce crop residue burning and boost sustainable food energy water security.

Stubble burning, combined with the traditional practice of tillage prior to crop establishment has a detrimental impact on soil health and quality. The development of Conservation Agriculture (CA) practices, characterised by the direct sowing of crop into standing (retained) stubble, is termed Zero-Till and provides a real alternative to traditional farming techniques. The Happy Seeder developed specifically for the intensive rice-wheat cropping system of the Indo-Gangetic Plains (with significant project investment by ACIAR) is presented as the single most viable option for direct sowing of wheat crops into standing rice stubble. As State Governments move towards enforcing a ban of the burning of stubble across India, it is likely that there will be an increased motivation by farmers to adopt the Happy Seeder. However, experience to date has indicated that Happy Seeder adoption has been less than optimal, there is a need to identify how farmer adoption can be accelerated.

Human development is possible only within planetary boundaries The tendency to pit economic development against the environment has led the world towards a dead end. Several voices called to reinterweave them, just as humanity is interwoven with the health of nonhuman natures and ultimately the planet. The notion of responsible wellbeing was suggested as being cognizant of the implications of consumption and accountability and the ways to factor in the interests of future generations. Responsible wellbeing for people and planet is about internalizing environmental and social costs in the true value of goods and services, recognizing that the value extends well beyond the monetary. It is about conceptualizing the systems underpinning humanity as socioecological or socionatural systems—and development as positive change in those systems. If we wish to celebrate another 30 years of human development, attention must extend to all societies and to the behaviour of citizens who have already achieved high levels of human development on traditional measures”

There is an increasing involvement of a number of non-state actors such as NGOs and community based organisations (CBOs) in poverty alleviation programmes. This calls for greater coordination among the actors for the effective implementation of such programmes. This article explores the various factors influencing coordination in multi-actor policy implementation, using a case study of a rural livelihoods enhancement programme implemented in the state of Odisha in India. The findings suggest that programme design, frequency of interaction, interdependency among actors, credibility of NGOs, leadership and personal traits have helped in coordination among state, NGOs and CBOs.

This Practical Handbook is directed to Members of Parliament and Parliamentary Advisors, who are considered “change agents”. It provides a comprehensive and systematic overview of the role that Parliamentarians can play in the creation of reliable, coherent, and transparent “enabling environments” in the range of areas related to investment in agriculture and food systems.

The Handbook does so, not through a catalog of prescriptions, but through guidance notes, examples of good practices, and very practical indications. It does not aim to provide a blueprint to be implemented by each Parliament but rather it sets out key stages of processes and mechanisms for MPs and advisors to consider while promoting responsible investment in agriculture and food systems.

Recognizing that the Asia and Pacific region was undergoing profound changes as a result of economic growth, urbanization, migration and climate change, and considering the effect of these changes on agricultural and food systems and the environment with consequences for food production, safety and availability in the coming decades, the 33 rd Asia and the Pacific Regional Conference, held in 2016 requested a Regional Initiative on One Health Priority areas developing FAO’s earlier work on zoonotic diseases and anti microbial resistance ( were identified A Regional Workshop involving 17 countries at which One Health issues in each country were discussed, gaps identified and plans of action proposed was held in Bangkok in October 2017 Following this, three countries Nepal, Papua New Guinea and Viet Nam expressed strong interest in taking part in a regional project Papua New Guinea requested support to raise awareness of food safety and improve biosecurity, including plant health, animal health, hygiene and public health measures Nepal requested assistance in reducing risks to human and occupational health through sustainable agriculture practices and improved food safety to advance nutrition within food systems, in addition to ongoing work on zoonotic diseases and AMR Viet Nam requested support to build capacity and update legal frameworks for pesticide use regulations, residue control for trade and safe and sustainable agriculture production Addressing the use of chemicals for chronic plant health problems and the resulting damage to the ecosystem and improving food safety to advance nutrition within food systems were named as priorities However, at the time the project was implemented, FAO Vietnam did not have an FAO Representative in place Communications between FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific and the Viet Nam country office and the concerned line ministry were considerably delayed By the time a FAO Representative was appointed, much of the implementation period had elapsed and there was little time available to deliver the originally planned activities In addition, the Government of Sri Lanka expressed interest that FAO provide technical support to develop a food safety policy and strategic plan for the country The external review of the food safety system in Sri Lanka, which was conducted by FAO in 2016 identified the non availability of a food safety policy and strategic framework as one of the key gaps in the country’s food safety programme Therefore, the Government requested that the World Health Organization ( and FAO).

Policy-making processes in developing countries often continue to operate devoid of evidence. In this study, we explore the research-policy linkages between the agroeconomic research system (AERS) and the agricultural policy system (APS) in India. Specifically, we examine questions directed to the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare in the two houses of the national parliament—the House of the People (Lok Sabha) and the Council of States (Rajya Sabha)—and filter them for key issues that confront the APS. In addition, using the list of research articles published in two major national agricultural economics journals, we examine the alignment of the AERS toward addressing pressing policy issues. We use 6,465 questions raised by elected representatives in the parliamentary houses and 377 research articles, both during the period 2014–2018. We use machine learning techniques for information retrieval because the required information is hidden as non-numerical text. Using tag clouds (lists of words by frequency), we identify key divergences between the concerns of the APS and the research focus of the AERS, and explore their linkages. To broaden our understanding, we employ latent Dirichlet allocation, a natural language processing technique that identifies crucial issues and automates their classification under appropriate clusters, to examine synergies between the research and policy systems. Results show remarkable alignment between the AERS and the APS, invalidating the two-communities hypothesis. We identify persistent issues in the policy domain that require the support of the research system, as well as potential areas for research system realignment.

Adoptions of improved technologies and production practices are important drivers of agricultural development in low-income countries like Nepal. Adopting a broad class of such technologies and practices is often critical for meeting the multifaceted goals of efficiency, profitability, environmental sustainability, and climate resilience. This study aims to address the knowledge gaps that still exist concerning what determines the adoption of improved technologies and production practices, the factors affecting their diffusion, the impact of interventions on productivity and crops grown, and the variability of impact within a particular country context. In this paper we address these questions using data collected as part of the USAID-led Knowledge-Based Integrated Sustainable Agriculture in Nepal (KISAN) project. We adopted a multistage sampling technique and surveyed 988 beneficiary households and 997 non-beneficiary households in KISAN intervention districts and non-intervention districts. Our findings suggest that, in Nepal, adoption of improved technologies and practices is significantly increased by improved access to markets, private sector involvement in selling improved seeds and disseminating information, membership in progressive farmers groups and cooperative societies, participation in agricultural training and farm visits, provision of subsidies for seeds, and access to credit. We also found the probability of the adoption of improved practices to be affected by farmers’ sources of information; for instance, the adoption of improved practices was increased when farmers obtained information from informal sources, cooperatives/farmers organizations, and public and private extension programs. The effects of KISAN projects vary significantly across the different crops grown, based on the evaluation models that address self-selection of both project participation and crop choices. These implications may also apply to other parts of the world facing similar challenges as Nepal, where limited market access, insufficient knowledge and resource capacity of farmers constrain their adoption of improved technologies and practices in agriculture.

Today’s unprecedented growth of data and their ubiquity in our lives are signs that the data revolution is transforming the world. And yet much of the value of data remains untapped. Data collected for one purpose have the potential to generate economic and social value in applications far beyond those originally anticipated. But many barriers stand in the way, ranging from misaligned incentives and incompatible data systems to a fundamental lack of trust. World Development Report 2021: Data for Better Lives explores the tremendous potential of the changing data landscape to improve the lives of poor people, while also acknowledging its potential to open back doors that can harm individuals, businesses, and societies. To address this tension between the helpful and harmful potential of data, this Report calls for a new social contract that enables the use and reuse of data to create economic and social value, ensures equitable access to that value, and fosters trust that data will not be misused in harmful ways. This Report begins by assessing how better use and reuse of data can enhance the design of public policies, programs, and service delivery, as well as improve market efficiency and job creation through private sector growth. Because better data governance is key to realizing this value, the Report then looks at how infrastructure policy, data regulation, economic policies, and institutional capabilities enable the sharing of data for their economic and social benefits, while safeguarding against harmful outcomes. The Report concludes by pulling together the pieces and offering an aspirational vision of an integrated national data system that would deliver on the promise of producing high-quality data and making them accessible in a way that promotes their safe use and reuse. By examining these opportunities and challenges, the Report shows how data can benefit the lives of all people, but particularly poor people in low- and middle-income countries.