+506 2216 0222
paesa@iica.int
Good practices of initiative:
Strategy for Technological Innovation to Improve the Productivity and Competitiveness of Supply Chains in Central America and the Dominican Republic
Effectiveness
This measures how well the objectives and goals set out in the initiative were fulfilled, as well as the extent to which the results achieved are attributable to the actions implemented by the initiative.
| Indicator | Description | Indicator Type | Measure Unit | Base date | Base | Goal | Measure Date | Measure | Compliance | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Local Agricultural Innovation Consortia (CLIA) established and operational | Local multi-sectoral consortia in Central America and the Caribbean, linking producers, INIAs, universities, municipalities, NGOs and the private sector around four chains: corn, beans, cassava and sweet pepper | Effectiveness | Number of consortia | 01-01-2011 | 0 | 22 | 01-12-2014 | 23 | 105 | Link |
| Number of key crop varieties validated under local conditions for transfer | Through 38 research and technological validation projects, 42 varieties were validated under local conditions: 17 varieties of maize (improved and native/creole), 13 varieties of beans (improved and native/creole), 9 varieties of cassava, and 3 varieties of sweet pepper. In addition, 2 low-cost organic control methods and alternative methods for storing maize and bean grain were validated. | Effectiveness | Number of varieties | 01-01-2011 | 0 | No específicada | 01-12-2014 | 42 | 100 | Link |
| Number of training and technology transfer activities carried out | Fifteen training plans were implemented, encompassing various training and technology transfer activities in eight countries. Surveys of producers revealed that training was the most valued element by beneficiaries, above improved seeds and technical assistance, across countries and crops. | Effectiveness | Number of activities | 01-01-2011 | 0 | No especificada | 01-12-2024 | 125 | 100 | Link |
Sustainability
It measures the installed capacities or actions identified to maintain or improve the results of the policy initiative.
| Indicator | Description | Indicator Type | Measure Unit | Base date | Base | Goal | Measure Date | Measure | Compliance | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of consortia with projected autonomous operating capacity after financing closure | Most of the established consortia are projected to continue operating once project financing has ended. Some consortia (such as the bean consortium in Honduras) have acquired their own assets (premises, tractors) and have self-generated funds, which strengthens their autonomy. | Sustainability | Number of consortia | 2011-01-01 | 0 | 22 | 23 | Sí | Link |
Learned lessons
Gained knowledge from implementing, evaluating, and managing a policy intervention, including why it was or was not effective and how it could be improved in the future.
| Lesson | Description | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Marketing and the market should be the starting point in agricultural innovation projects with family farming | The project prioritized hard technological innovations (varieties, agronomic management, seeds), when the main demand and constraint for producers was marketing and market access. Producer surveys and systematization workshops in all countries and value chains consistently identified the market as the most significant restrictive factor, above seeds or technology. Consequently, incorporating market studies, business plans, and value-added strategies from the design stage would have generated more relevant and useful results for producers. Future projects of a similar nature should begin with a marketing analysis before defining technological interventions. | Link |
| The formation of multi-sectoral innovation networks (consortia) is a lasting institutional innovation that transcends the project cycle | One of the project's most significant achievements was the establishment and activation of 23 Local Agricultural Innovation Consortia, incorporating not only National Agricultural Innovation Institutes (INIAs) but also universities, municipalities, NGOs, producer organizations, and the private sector. Most of these consortia are projected to continue operating even after PRESICA funding ceases, representing a different approach to research, development, and innovation. This institutional innovation breaks with the traditional paradigm centered on National Research Institutes by incorporating local stakeholders, addressing local needs, and connecting local and regional perspectives. The key to success was the consortia's collaborative work culture and shared agenda. | Link |
| Innovation projects in family farming require periods longer than three years to consolidate lasting results | The project was designed to last three years (36 months), but in practice, most consortia were only able to activate one or two cultivation cycles, insufficient time for lasting results in biological research and the maturation of innovation networks. The logistical and administrative aspects inherent in working with organizations from multiple countries caused implementation delays. Technology adoption is a process that requires several years to consolidate. Likewise, administrative issues (funds not available on time) directly affected technical progress in some consortia, such as the maize consortium in the Dominican Republic, where seed multiplication plots were lost. Similar projects should consider longer timeframes and more agile mechanisms for accessing funding. | Link |
| The formation and operation of agricultural innovation networks requires management skills that are not typical of traditional technical-scientific profiles | The work must be guided by multidisciplinary teams; it cannot rely on a single discipline. New skills were identified as being required at both the individual and institutional levels: leadership, network management, negotiation, and results-based monitoring. Additionally, institutional rivalries among stakeholders who must collaborate pose a real risk that must be explicitly addressed in the design and implementation of projects. | Link |