The increasing complexity of technology development and adoption is rapidly changing the effectiveness of scientific and technological policies. Complex technologies are developed and disseminated by networks of agents. The impact of these networks depends on the assets they command, their learning routines, the socio-economic environment in which they operate and their history.
Ethiopian agriculture is changing as new actors, relationships, and policies influence the ways in which small-scale, resource-poor farmers access and use information and knowledge in their agricultural production decisions. Although these changes suggest new opportunities for smallholders, too little is known about how changes will ultimately improve the wellbeing of smallholders in Ethiopia. The authors of this paper examine whether these changes are improving the ability of smallholders to innovate and thus improve their own welfare.
This paper uses household and key informant survey data from Ethiopia to: (1) understand the organizational structures that influence change in dairy production systems; (2) explore how local-level innovation system networks are functioning in the smallholder dairy production and (3) identify intervention points for strengthening innovation capacity. Results revealed that public sector actors are the major role players in the dairy production system despite their minor role in marketing linkages. We also found out that the private sector actors play peripheral roles in the network.
This paper (Part II) presents work to develop a network diagnosis tool for stakeholders involved in agricultural supply chains in Bolivia. It is complemented by a further paper (Part I) by Boru Douthwaite and colleagues in the same issue of this journal which presents a case study of work conducted by the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). The prototype methods used in both Parts I and II are based on social network analysis (SNA) methodology.
This paper (Part I) present a case study of work conducted by the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) to adapt network mapping techniques to a rural and developing country context. It reports on work in Colombia to develop a prototype network diagnosis tool for use by service providers who work to strengthen small rural groups. It is complemented by a further paper in this issue by Louise Clark (Part II) which presents work to develop a network diagnosis tool for stakeholders involved in agricultural supply chains in Bolivia.
Contemporarily, agriculture is facing many challenges connected with growing food demand and scarcity of natural resources. In meeting these challenges innovation has become of crucial importance. The paper aims at providing an insight on the topic of the needs and possibilities of open innovation and its significance for the transition towards sustainable and more productive agriculture of EU. We argue that given the complexity of innovation process there emerges the need for effective interactions between all actors of agriculture sector.
This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion in the scientific literature on the advantages and disadvantages of privatization of extension and advisory services and the shift from thinking in terms of the traditional Agricultural Knowledge System towards a broader Agricultural Innovation System.
The agricultural innovation systems approach emphasizes the collective nature of innovation and stresses that innovation is a co-evolutionary process, resulting from alignment of technical, social, institutional and organizational dimensions. These insights are increasingly informing interventions that focus on setting up multi-stakeholder initiatives, such as innovation platforms and networks, as mechanisms for enhancing agricultural innovation, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.
In the systems perspective on innovation, co-operation between several different types of actors is seen as key to successful innovation. Due to the existence of several gaps that hinder such effective co-operation, the scientific and policy literature persistently points at the need for intermediary organizations to fulfill bridging and brokerage roles. This paper aims to provide an overview of the insights from the literature on such ‘innovation brokers’, and to contribute to the literature by distilling lines of enquiry and providing insights on one of the lines identified.
In innovation studies, communication received explicit attention in the context of studies on the adoption and diffusion of innovation that dominated the field in the 1940‐1970 period. Since then, our theoretical understanding of both innovation and communication has changed markedly. However, a systematic rethinking of the role of communication in innovation processes is largely lacking. This article reconceptualises the role of everyday communication and communicative intervention in innovation processes, and discusses practical implications.