The European Innovation Partnership for agricultural productivity and sustainability (EIP-AGRI), which can be perceived as a platform based on interaction among farmers, researchers, and advisors/extensionists, represents a useful tool for a better understanding of applied innovation processes.
This report presents the results of a study that shall contribute to provide information on the national organisation of agricultural research and an overall picture of developments in agricultural research in 33 selected countries (current EU28 plus Iceland, Israel, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey). The study covers all areas related to agricultural and food research research including research dedicated to emerging challenges of the European agricultural and food sector in 2006/2007.
This article starts by describing the evolution of innovation in agricultural research and cooperation for development, including an historical overview of agricultural research for development from green revolution to the re-discover of traditional knowledge. Then the authors analyze participation in innovation processes and make a comparison of innovation systems and platforms targeting the agri-food sector in developing countries. A particular focus is reserved to the European regional networks and to the experience of the USAID Middle East Water and Livelihoods Initiative.
Grants for agricultural innovation are common but grant funds specifically targeted to smallholder farmers remain relatively rare. Nevertheless, they are receiving increasing recognition as a promising venue for agricultural innovation. They stimulate smallholders to experiment with improved practices, to become proactive and to engage with research and extension providers. The systematic review covered three modalities of disbursing these grants to smallholder farmers and their organisations: vouchers, competitive grants and farmer-led innovation support funds.
This report presents the main results of the EU-funded IN-SIGHT project ‘Strengthening Innovation Processes for Growth and Development’. The authors sketched out a conceptual framework and knowledge base for a more effective European policy on innovation in agriculture and rural areas. Both conceptual framework and knowledge base are consistent with the new European agenda for agricultural and rural policy and sensitive to the diversity of the European agricultural and rural systems.
According to transition science, system innovation requires experimentation and social learning to explore the potential of innovations for sustainable development. However, the transition science literature does not elaborate much on the learning processes involved. Senge's Field of Change provides a more detailed approach to the role of learning and action in innovation. We linked the Field of Change to transition management literature in order to explore social learning in an agricultural innovation experiment in the Netherlands called the ‘New Mixed Farm’.
In this paper the authors used a network perspective to study the micro level of agricultural innovation systems and investigate the different roles and functions that collaborating actors have to perform to spread their innovation both horizontally and vertically. Based on a literature review, we distinguish between three separate network functions: (1) learning and knowledge co-creation, (2) upscaling and institutional entrepreneurship and (3) outscaling and innovation brokerage.
Grassroots initiatives for sustainable development are blossoming, offering localised alternatives for a range of societal functions including food and energy. Research into grassroots organisations often recognises the difficulties grassroots groups face to continue operations. However, there is a need for better understanding dynamics that enable or constrain grassroots organisational survival. Here, we specifically shed light on how such survival is dependent on the organisation’s ability to construct legitimacy.
Participatory action research (PAR) is an approach for fully co-creating research into environmental problems with the public. The paper argues this is mostly done for manifest environmental problems that clearly threaten livelihoods and have highly predictable impacts. But the conventional PAR approach is not suitable when the impacts are poorly understood and pose a low threat to livelihoods. Such latent environmental problems do not have a clear conflict to be resolved; instead, the community’s inertia should be overcome.
How do systemic intermediaries obtain legitimate roles for themselves in innovation systems and transition processes? This is still an understudied question in the study of systemic intermediaries. This study started from the observation that roles, or positions, are not given, but emerge in interactions as a negotiated set of rights and obligations.