Linking system perspectives with user perspectives to identify adoption barriers to food security innovations for smallholder farmers – evidence from rural Tanzania

Kuntosch, Anett; König, Bettina

doi:10.1007/s12571-018-0821-4

Cited by 10 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, some scholars have explicitly rejected adoption frameworks to analyse technological change and innovation systems (Glover et al 2016(Glover et al , 2019Hermans et al 2020), while, at the same time, acknowledging that adoption and diffusion are pragmatic measures of the individual and collective benefits of innovation systems. This is especially relevant in regards to understanding and measuring the impact of research and extension activities in agricultural innovation systems (Douthwaite et al 2003;Eastwood et al 2017;Wigboldus et al 2016), and understating adoption at multiple levels, geographical scales and contexts (Hermans et al 2020;Kuntosch & König 2018;Prokopy et al 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is clear that such measures need to capture the dynamics and fluidity of adoption through the adoption process (Eastwood et al, 2017;Glover et al, 2019;Hermans et al, 2020;Kuehne et al, 2017), capturing both individual and collective adoption and offering the ability to differentiate adoption patterns for distinct groups of individuals (Boru Douthwaite et al 2003;Jabbar et al 1998;Prokopy et al 2019;Stringer et al 2020), types of technologies (B. Douthwaite et al 2001;Sartas et al 2020) and their context (Kuntosch & König 2018;Wigboldus et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adoption pathway analysis: Representing the dynamics and diversity of adoption for agricultural practices

Munguia

Pannell

Llewellyn

et al. 2021

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CONTEXTScholars have argued that empirical studies of adoption in agriculture should consider adoption as a dynamic process rather than a binary choice, but many empirical studies continue to be based on cross-sectional surveys in which adoption is treated binarily. In general, surveys put more emphasis on investigating adoption drivers (i.e. independent variables) at the expense of defining complete adoption measures (i.e. dependent variables). SIGNIFICANCEOur approach provides a method for adoption research with a highly informative way to unpack the diversity of dynamic adoption pathways for agricultural practices, addressing the current imbalance in survey design that puts more emphasis on potential drivers of adoption at the expense of adoption measures. We discuss the potential uses of adoption pathways analysis to agricultural researchers and extension agents, and its potential to contribute to better explaining past adoption or predicting future adoption.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adoption pathway analysis: Representing the dynamics and diversity of adoption for agricultural practices

Munguia

Pannell

Llewellyn

et al. 2021

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We note, however, that the transfer of information between stakeholders does not of itself guarantee the transformation of knowledge into action (Ferré et al, 2022). Likewise, implementation through farmers’ groups is often said to enhance adoption but may nonetheless require additional support to create a substantial impact (Kuntosch & König, 2018). One approach may be to increase support for extension services (i.e.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Living with rodent pests: Unifying stakeholder interests to prioritise pest management in rural Madagascar

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rodent pests can have major social, economic, and environmental impacts. Their management, therefore, represents a complex socio‐ecological problem involving a network of stakeholders from across different sectors, with diverging and sometimes competing interests. Failure to incorporate stakeholder interests can result in ineffective or unsustainable management programmes, with unintended negative consequences for people and nature. Participatory approaches to decision‐making have been proposed as suitable strategies to tackle complex problems, yet, these processes are often considered too difficult, costly, or time‐consuming to implement. To facilitate a participatory approach to rodent control in Madagascar, we identified and mapped key stakeholders and developed a multisector framework for guiding rodent management programmes based on current literature and expert recommendations. We then carried out interviews and focus groups with stakeholders and end‐users to validate the final framework. The final framework unifies stakeholder interests around the dimensions of People, Resources, Knowledge and Power. Combined application of the stakeholder map and framework provides decision‐makers with the tools to identify stakeholder interests; to explore areas of conflict, as well as areas of agreement; and to ensure that these are addressed within the design of control programmes. As an assessment tool, the framework can also be used to evaluate the responsiveness of programmes to the needs of different stakeholders and assess whether objectives are being reached. We recommend the application of the stakeholder map and framework to encourage and strengthen participatory approaches aimed at rodent pest control. Due to the inclusive and interdisciplinary nature of the framework, it can be applied to address numerous complex social, environmental, and economic issues across scales, sectors, and systems. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

show abstract

“…Other factors impeding the adoption of technologies include negative attitudes to innovation, lack of knowledge, low willingness to adopt innovations at the early stage of their development, perceived complexity and relevance to smallholder farmers as well as limited availability (Kuntosch and König, 2018;Naswem and Ejembi, 2017). Broader factors are farmers' socioeconomic characteristics, political conditions, high cost for perceived benefits, limited access to inputs, low motivation and adverse attitude toward risk and/or change (Meijer et al, 2015).…”

Section: Barriers Preventing Adoption and How To Overcome Themmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and scale-up of bioprotectants to keep staple foods safe from aflatoxin contamination in Africa

Bandyopadhyay¹,

Ortega‐Beltran²,

Konlambigue³

et al. 2021

Burleigh Dodds Series in Agricultural Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aflatoxins pose a significant public health risk, decrease productivity and profitability and hamper trade. To minimize aflatoxin contamination a biocontrol technology based on atoxigenic strains of Aspergillus flavus that do not produce aflatoxin is used widely in the United States. The technology, with the generic name Aflasafe, has been improved and adapted for use in Africa. Aflasafe products have been developed or are currently being developed in 20 African countries. Aflatoxin biocontrol is being scaled up for use in several African countries through a mix of public, private, and public-private interventions. Farmers in several countries have commercially treated nearly 400,000 ha of maize and groundnut achieving >90% reduction in aflatoxin contamination. This chapter summarizes the biology of aflatoxin-producing fungi and various factors affecting their occurence, including climate change. Various management practices for aflatoxin mitigation are then discussed. These include biological control, which is increasingly being adopted by farmers in several countries. We discuss biocontrol product development and commercialization in various African countries. Subsequently, we highlight some barriers to adoption and other challenges.

show abstract

Linking system perspectives with user perspectives to identify adoption barriers to food security innovations for smallholder farmers – evidence from rural Tanzania

Cited by 10 publications

References 23 publications

Adoption pathway analysis: Representing the dynamics and diversity of adoption for agricultural practices

Adoption pathway analysis: Representing the dynamics and diversity of adoption for agricultural practices

Living with rodent pests: Unifying stakeholder interests to prioritise pest management in rural Madagascar

Development and scale-up of bioprotectants to keep staple foods safe from aflatoxin contamination in Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About