This article examines the diagnosis of the Agricultural Innovation System (SIA) in the department of Tolima, Colombia, as part of a project led by the Colombian Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Technological University of Pereira (TUP), which also evaluated the National Agricultural Innovation System (NAIS) in regions such as Chocó, Bolívar, and Meta. A methodology was used that involved a survey with 58 questions on a Likert scale with 300 participants, evaluated with congruence and relevance indexes, identifying key variables in the operation of the Agricultural Innovation System (AIS). A survey was applied to map actors in the National Innovation System for Higher Education in Agriculture, as well as the participating actors in the regional agricultural innovation systems of Tolima to identify gaps in extension, innovation, development, sustainability, information technology (TI), education, and training. Among the conclusions, it stands out that the associativity subsystem presents the lowest performance and is close to a score of two on the scale of gaps. An evaluation was carried out among the five subsystems, including extension, TI, environmental aspects, and public policy. The department of Tolima shows low performance in innovation and TI, while their extension performance is less weak. In Chaparral, there is a general lag, with innovation being the worst evaluated subsystem. Rovira obtains high scores in most subsystems, although innovation and TI have lower scores. At the national and regional levels, innovation is low, and communication among the NARS actors is insufficient, which highlights the need to promote good practices, strategies, and projects.

This article examines the diagnosis of the Agricultural Innovation System (SIA) in the department of Tolima, Colombia, as part of a project led by the Colombian Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Technological University of Pereira (TUP), which also evaluated the National Agricultural Innovation System (NAIS) in regions such as Chocó, Bolívar, and Meta. A methodology was used that involved a survey with 58 questions on a Likert scale to 300 participants, evaluated with congruence and relevance indexes, identifying key variables in the operation of the Agricultural Innovation System (AIS). A survey was also applied to actors of the National Innovation System for Higher Education in Agriculture, A survey was also applied to map the participating actors in the regional agricultural innovation systems of Tolima to identify gaps in extension, innovation, development, sustainability, ICT, education and training. Among the conclusions, it stands out that the associativity subsystem presents the lowest lag and is close to a score of two on the scale of gaps, evaluation carried out among the five subsystems including extension, ICT, environmental aspects, and pub-lic policy. The department of Tolima shows low performance in innovation and ICT, while the extension is less lagging. In Chaparral there is a general lag, with innovation being the worst evaluated subsystem. Rovira obtains high scores in most subsystems, although innovation and ICT have lower scores. At the national and regional levels, innovation is low, and articulation among NARS actors is insufficient, which highlights the need to promote good practices, strategies, and projects.