The Farmer Business School (FBS) is a participatory, action learning process focused on product and business development, and like the Farmer Field School, is a complex, multi-dimensional innovation with the potential to benefit large numbers of farming households economically, socially and institutionally. Scaling this approach requires rethinking both innovation and scaling.
Social learning in multi-actor innovation networks is increasingly considered an important precondition for addressing sustainability in regional development contexts. Social learning is seen as a means for enabling stakeholders to take advantage of the diversity in perspectives, interests and values for generating more sustainable practices and policies. Although more and more research is done on the meaning and manifestations of social learning, particularly in the context of natural resource management, little is known about the social dynamics in the process of social learning.
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.
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.
Agricultural education, research, and extension can contribute substantially to reducing rural poverty in the developing world. However, evidence suggests that their contributions are falling short in Sub-Saharan Africa. The entry of new actors, technologies, and market forces, when combined with new economic and demographic pressures, suggests the need for more innovative and less linear approaches to promoting a technological transformation of smallholder agriculture.
his paper draws on the transition literature to examine niche-regime interaction. Specifically it aims to reveal and contribute to an understanding of the processes that link sustainable agriculture innovation networks to the agricultural regime. It analyses findings from participatory workshops with actors in 17 Learning and Innovation Networks for Sustainable Agriculture (LINSA) across Europe. Framing linkage as an adaptive process, whereby regime actors and entities adapt to incorporate LINSA, and vice versa, reveals different patterns and processes of adaptation.
This paper is an attempt to take stock of the authors' work. In Section 2, the authors reflect upon the emergence and fairly rapid diffusion of the concept ‘national system of innovation’ as well as related concepts. In Section 3, they describe how the Aalborg-version of the concept evolved by a combination of ideas that moved from production structure towards including all elements and relationships contributing to innovation and competence building.
This paper reviews the NIS literature chronologically, showing how this shift in emphasis has diminished somewhat the importance of both institutions, particularly governments, and the political processes of institutional capacity building.
Using Nepal as a case, this paper illustrates how farmers and their supporting institutions are evolving and co-producing climate sensitive technologies on demand. Drawing upon the hypothesis of induced innovation, the authors examine the extent to which resource endowments have influenced the evolution of technological and institutional innovations in Nepal’s agricultural research and development. This study reveals that Nepal has developed a novel multilevel institutional partnership, including collaboration with farmers and other non-governmental organizations in recent years.
Managers and policy makers have struggled to develop effective monitoring systems to track the evolution of research organizations. This paper presents the first components of a novel monitoring system for monitoring such organizations. These components can be used to generate detailed static pictures of the actual activities and partnerships of a large research program or organization, in other words, what the organization is actually doing, with whom, where, how and for what purpose.