Addressing complex challenges using a co-innovation approach: Lessons from five case studies in the New Zealand primary sector

Abstract

Co-innovation can be effective for complex challenges-involving interactions amongst multiple stakeholders, viewpoints, perceptions, practices and interests across programmes, sectors and national systems. Approaches to challenges in the primary sector have tended to be linear, where tools and outputs are developed by a few, mostly scientists/researchers, and then extended to stakeholders. A co-innovation approach first deciphers and delineates the biophysical, societal, regulatory, policy, economic and environmental drivers, constraints and controls influencing these challenges at multiple levels. Second, stakeholder interactions and perspectives can inform and change the focus as well as help in co-developing solutions to deliver agreed outcomes. However, there is limited systematic and comparative research on how coinnovation works out in different projects. Here we analyse the results of applying a co-innovation approach to five research projects in the New Zealand primary sector. The projects varied in depth and breadth of stakeholder engagement, availability of ready-made solutions and prevalence of interests and conflicts. The projects show how and why co-innovation approaches in some cases contributed to a shared understanding of complex problems. Our results confirm the context specificity of co-innovation practices.

Using a co-innovation approach to support innovation and learning: Cross-cutting observations from different settings and emergent issues

“…The issue of pace and space in co-innovation Vereijssen et al (2017) point out that a number of coinnovation projects in the same New Zealand program experienced project "slow down" related to practical considerations such as the need to communicate, negotiate, organize meetings, follow-up and other logistical issues around engagement, adding cost in terms of time and resources. These issues were particularly troublesome where contract timing and milestones were in place with little scope to act on what emerged from further engagement.…”

“…Fielke et al (2017) noted how RMs deliberately allowed for the actors involved to create space, where they could enact their own collective transitions toward project outcomes and how RMs created the space for reflection within the project teams. Vereijssen et al (2017) discuss the need for creating a space for broadening the context of a project into an 'innovation space' and learning about innovation across scales. Van Dijk et al (2017) also refer to deliberately creating space for 'joint learning and knowledge sharing through innovation networks, which bring together different actors, with different (forms or sources of) knowledge'.…”

“…Malley et al (2017), for example, mention that 'organizational innovation' is critical for effective and efficient coordination and engagement of multiple stakeholders, while Coutts et al (2017) discuss how 'organizational boundaries and peoples' personal characteristics were a barrier to learning'. Van Dijk et al (2017) talk about the influence of 'institutional context' on co-innovation and Vereijssen et al (2017) mention that 'institutional setting' is important. Institutional logics seem to be a very relevant concept for co-innovation (see also its application in Turner et al 2016) and requires more attention in co-innovation scholarship and the practical design of co-innovation projects.…”

“…Vereijssen et al (2017) point out that co-innovation can be effective for complex challengesinvolving multifarious interactions among multiple stakeholders, viewpoints, perceptions, practices and interests across programs, sectors and national systems. The authors conclude that flexibility and adaptability were important in achieving positive results from a co-innovation approach and that the institutional setting and ability to create the space and buy-in for co-innovation also mattered.…”

Collective action for inclusive value-chain innovation: Implementation and results of the Participatory Market Chain Approach

“…The PMCA is what Vereijssen et al (2017) refer to as a "co-innovation approach," with the overarching goal of improving the use of research for development. The PMCA engages agricultural researchers and smallholder farmers along with other value-chain actors, public officials and service providers 2 in facilitated group processes aimed at identifying and developing business opportunities.…”