In 2012, the Food Systems Innovation (FSI) initiative was set up between four Australian organisations working to improve the impact of agriculture and food security programs in the Indo-Pacific region. The author was assigned to facilitate a stream of work in the partnership, working as an internal partnership broker in one of the four partner organisations, the Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO).
Partnership brokering is needed to work out new ways of organising food systems that treat agricultural smallholders as a resource and opportunity rather than a problem or distraction. This is because food systems are demanding innovation in the way they are organised. This is a matter of transforming stakeholders into partners in order to reconfigure food systems to operate differently, rather than just operate more efficiently. Fundamental systemic changes are needed as our contemporary food system is failing to deliver the food we increasingly demand.
This tool helps the design of comprehensive capacity development interventions aimed at strengthening mainly functional capacities. The purpose of this tool is to provide an overview of the different options in terms of capacity development modalities that an innovation partnership can consider while developing the action plan.
The multi-stakeholders Assessment Form is a tool to enable the different actors creating a partnership to ask systematic questions to a potential partner to ensure a good fit with the goal, vision and needs of the partnership. This tool can be used at the development/ starting point phase of the partnership to explore a potential relationship.
The Outcome mapping factsheet provides a series of steps to gather information on the outcomes of the process initiated by capacity development for agricultural innovation. This tool provides an overview of the outcome mapping methodology used for planning and assessing projects/programmes oriented towards change and social transformation. A simplified version (three stages and 10 steps) is proposed, based on the original IDRC methodology and experiences from the application in the CDAIS project.
This tool is designed for reviewing the partnership to assess whether it is achieving the goals of the individual actors or partner organisations. It is essentially a ‘health check’ of the innovation partnership. This tool can offer an opportunity to the partners to reflect on the value of the partnership from their own organization’s perspective. It also helps to assess what-if any- changes would improve the effectiveness of the partnership and to agree as a group to any revisions to the partnership agreement taking into account the findings of the review process.
The goal of this tool is to help facilitators examine the roles that women and men play in an innovation partnership and to better integrate their specific needs and priorities in the interventions planned for the innovation partnership. Gender analysis of the innovation partnership can also be done throughout project implementation to monitor how men and women are integrated and benefit from the project and to reduce the gender gaps.
This paper briefly reviews three conceptual frameworks: namely, the national agricultural research system (NARS), the agricultural knowledge and information system (AKIS) and the agricultural innovation system (AIS) concepts. Next, the paper reviews the definition of ‘innovation’ and proposes that agricultural innovation can occur at four different but interlinked domains.
LenCD has prepared a joint statement on results and capacity development (presented in this publication), which stresses that meaningful, sustainable results are premised on proper investments in capacity development and that these results materialize at different levels and at different times, along countries’ development trajectory. To provide evidence in support of this statement, LenCD launched a call for submission of stories.
This paper looks at brokerage functions in a project on building innovation capacity through improved networking. Innovation capacity influences how actors respond to changes in their environments. In such dynamic environments well connected sets of actors are at an advantage in that they can combine skills to address the emerging opportunities and challenges. However, policy and cultural barriers especially in African innovation systems raise the transaction costs of networking leading to weak connectivity among actors thus poor innovation capacity.