There is sufficient evidence, drawn from surveys of innovation in the public sector and cognitive testing interviews with public sector managers, to develop a framework for measuring public sector innovation. Although many questions that are covered in the Oslo Manual guidelines for measuring innovation in the private sector can be applied with some modifications to the public sector, public sector innovation surveys need to meet policy needs that require collecting additional types of data.

While national governments are the main actors in innovation policy, it is observed a proliferation of challenge-oriented innovation policies both at the subnational and the supranational level. This begs the question about subsidiarity: what innovation policies for societal challenges should be organized at subnational, national and supranational levels?

Science, technology and innovation (STI) policy is shaped by persistent framings that arise from historical context. Two established frames are identified as co-existing and dominant in contemporary innovation policy discussions. The first frame is identified as beginning with a Post-World War II institutionalisation of government support for science and R&D with the presumption that this would contribute to growth and address market failure in private provision of new knowledge.

This paper discusses ICT for Open Innovation (OI) from a capabilities perspective. The study distinguish two types of capabilities for OI: strategic, which need to be developed so that the organization can take advantage of an OI strategy proactively, and operational for the efficient implementation of OI processes.

This article conceptualizes the diffusion of user innovations from a service ecosystem perspective. With the focus on sustainable innovations, the service ecosystem is evaluated, along with other systemic innovation concepts, as a possible theoretical basis for explaining the first adoption and diffusion of user innovations.

Rather than merely supporting R&D and strengthening innovation systems, the focus of innovation policy is currently shifting towards addressing societal challenges by transforming socio-economic systems. A particular trend within the emerging era of transformative innovation policy is the pursuit of challenge-based innovation missions, such as achieving a 50 % circular economy by 2030. By formulating clear and ambitious societal goals, policy makers are aiming to steer the directionality and adoption of innovation.

CCAFS-MOT is a tool to support farmers, policy advisors and agricultural extension services on the choice of management practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) without risking food security. It is an Excel-based tool which brings together several empirical models to estimate GHG emissions in rice, cropland and livestock systems, and provides information about the most effective mitigation options. Greenhouse gas emissions are estimated in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent per hectare (kg CO2eq ha− 1) and carbon dioxide equivalent per unit of product (kg CO2eq kg− 1).

Food sustainability transitions refer to transformation processes necessary to move towards sustainable food systems. Digitization is one of the most important ongoing transformation processes in global agriculture and food chains. The review paper explores the contribution of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to transition towards sustainability along the food chain (production, processing, distribution, consumption). A particular attention is devoted to precision agriculture as a food production model that integrates many ICTs.

What efforts need to be made to effectively mainstream gender in agrifood value chain projects and programmes? When can a value chain intervention be considered ‘gender-sensitive’? What actions can be implemented to address gender inequalities along the chain?

This briefing note sets out, at the start of this collaborative learning journey, the authors understandings of collaborations and capacity development and how these relate to activities within the network. The final section outlines the main elements of our approach to monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL)