No abstract

No abstract

Abstract:To foster sustainable regional development, many regions rely on innovations. To safeguard the generation of innovations and their market introduction, companies have increasingly used technology roadmapping and open innovation. The project INNOrural (Innovations for sustainable rural development) expanded these concepts by applying them to regions. This led to the rise of the "Regional Open Innovation Roadmapping" framework for innovation-based regional development (ROIR). This framework was tested by conducting two innovation roadmapping processes in the model region of Märkisch-Oderland (MOL), Germany: the certification of regional wood fuel and the establishment of a competence center for precision farming technology. Both innovation ideas were selected during the roadmapping process by applying a sustainability assessment. After 12 months, two complete roadmaps were ready for implementation. Key principles of ROIR were identified, including the use of a clear and replicable sustainability assessment method, the involvement of all relevant stakeholder groups in the early process and the cooperation between regional and subject experts. Generally, the broader adaptation of ROIR for additional regions will be useful. Nevertheless, the ROIR processes need to be evaluated in depth to develop a better understanding and to provide evidence of the benefits and limitations of this approach. OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2015, 7 2302

The implementation of eco-innovations can be a strategy to combine economic benefit and reduce negative environmental impact. German greenhouse production is highly energy intensive, as heating and energy account for the second largest cost factor. Thus, the sector wants to develop and implement eco-innovations to speed up the process towards increased sustainability. In this paper, a sectoral systems of innovation (SSI) analysis is presented to identify and describe interrelated systemic barriers for developing and implementing such innovations into the sector. The SSI was used as an analytical framework, which enabled covering different system levels and components in the research in order to draw a comprehensive picture of this specific innovation environment. A mixed-methods, explorative approach was used: a literature analysis, followed by an expert workshop and semi-structured expert interviews, was conducted to understand the barriers for development and implementation of such innovations. A SWOT workshop assisted in generalizing results from selected innovation examples. A complementary two-wave Delphi study was used to identify innovation activity, important actors, policies and drivers within horticulture. Based on these data, we were able to identify different barrier-types, showing how they are interconnected and affect innovation processes increasing ecological modernization of the sector.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. summary: Agricultural innovations are meant to master global challenges such as climate change. However, they are often subject to highly controversial societal debates, such as in the case of genetic engineering or certain forms of animal production. This paper provides insight in the extent to which these conflicts are rooted in the conditions and processes of agricultural innovation. We analyze the German agricultural innovation system from an adapted systems perspective and present three case studies. These case studies potentially contribute to solving current challenges and are influenced in their development process by different factors: different technologies, actors, links to other branches, overlapping frame conditions and current challenges as well as societal debates. The innovation system concept applied to different system levels provides insight into interrelationships and hence allows us to identify starting points for improvement. The explanation and potential solution in mastering the high expectations on agricultural innovation and societal debates the authors point to two aspects: 1) As it is in many other areas trust is an important basis for innovative collaboration in small networks. (2) At the same time innovation success depends on the incorporation of societal trends in innovation processes, e. g. via a greater involvement of consumers and retailers at an early stage. Overall, besides the balancing of continuity and openness of agricultural innovation networks, our results raise questions for the (self-)concept and design of the agricultural innovation system, for incentives and shaping of interdisciplinary collaboration as well as for the (self-)role model of the involved actors. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may