The chapter is a part of the book Innovation platforms for agricultural development edited by Iddo Dror, Jean-Joseph Cadilhon, Marc Schut, Michael Misiko and Shreya Maheshwari. It introduces the background for the setting up of innovation platforms (IPs), initiation and function of the three IPs in Ethiopian highlands, innovation fund to support fodder development, the role of different actors in scaling up, outcomes and impact of the intervention, and lessons learned.

The relationship between motivation and participation in five agricultural research and development innovation platforms (IPs) in Africa’s Great Lakes Region is examined. We analyze data from surveys and in-depth interviews, and focus group discussions. Although farmers prioritized new knowledge and skills, these were not sufficient to consistently foster active participation. Anticipated economic (markets, income, and credit) and material (agricultural inputs) livelihood benefits did encourage active farmer participation.

Agricultural development interventions tend to favour men. Women do most of the work and receive fewer benefits. A starting point is to assess gender capacities to give momentum to the implementation of strategic interventions responding to the needs of both men and women. The gender capacity assessment tool is participatory; the process can be seen as a gender sensitization activity for partners; it helps to generate useful data for M&E of gender capacity development interventions; It provides the opportunity to design a strategic gender capacity development intervention.

Results from the gender capacity assessment shows, in general, that development and research organizations lack the knowledge and skills to integrate gender into their agricultural programs. Addressing gender-inequity in agriculture will require increased investment in skills and knowledge for value chain actors and enablers.

In this paper its argued that when flexibly applied and adapted to capture dynamics typical in systems innovation projects, the Log Frame Approach (LFA) ( and logical frameworks have considerable utility to support evaluation for both learning and accountability, and for identifying and addressing institutional logics, which leads to system innovation.

Primary Innovation is a five year collaborative initiative demonstrating and evaluating co-innovation, a systemic approach to innovation addressing complex problems, in five ‘innovation projects’ (active case studies) in different agricultural industries. In defining the elements of co-innovation, Primary Innovation has emphasised nine principles which guide activity in the innovation projects.

This paper describes a process for stimulating this engagement to develop a shared understanding of systemic problems, challenge prevalent institutional logics, and identify individual and collective actions that change agents might undertake to stimulate system innovation. To achieve this the process included (i) multiple actors from the agricultural innovation systems, (ii) steps to prompt reflexivity to challenge underlying institutional logics, (iii) an iterative process of practical experimentation to challenge current practices, and (iv) actions to encourage generative collaboration.

This study identifies systemic problems in the New Zealand Agricultural Innovation System (AIS) that affect the ability of participants in the agricultural sectors to co-develop technologies. We integrate structural and functional streams of innovation system enquiry, gathering data through 30 semi-structured interviews with individuals in Government, industry and research. Interviews explored perceptions of the influence of actors, interactions, institutions, infrastructure, and market structure on the effectiveness of AIS functions.

In this article it is analysed the results of applying a co-innovation approach to five research projects in the New Zealand primary sector. The projects varied in depth and breadth of stakeholder engagement, availability of ready-made solutions, and prevalence of interests and conflicts. The projects show how and why co-innovation approaches in some cases contributed to a shared understanding of complex problems. Our results confirm the context-specificity of co-innovation practices

This paper details the analytical framework used for developing a nested understanding of systemic innovation capacity in an AIS. The paper then introduces the two case studies, along with the data and methods of analysis, followed by a presentation of the results as timelines of configurations of capabilities at different levels of the AIS.