Opening design and innovation processes in agriculture: Insights from design and management sciences and future directions

Berthet, Elsa; Hickey, Gordon M.; Klerkx, Laurens

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2018.06.004

Cited by 113 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such coalitions can be formed within an innovation platform to empower vulnerable stakeholders from within or forming a parallel, often competing, innovation platform to negotiate with the dominant actors from outside. Positive outcomes may result from adopting inclusive definitions of legitimate stakeholders and ensuring an explicit focus on the empowerment of marginalized groups from the very beginning of agricultural innovation initiatives (see [99]).…”

Section: Empowerment Of Minority Coalitions For Learning and Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Platform, Participation, and Power: How Dominant and Minority Stakeholders Shape Agricultural Innovation

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within agricultural innovation systems (AIS), various stakeholder groups inevitably interpret 'innovation' from their own vantage point of privilege and power. In rural developing areas where small-scale and subsistence farming systems support livelihoods, dominant policy actors often focus heavily on participatory modernization and commercialization initiatives to enhance productivity, access, and quality. However, existing social hierarchies may undermine the potential of such initiatives to promote inclusive and sustainable farmer-driven innovation. Focusing on the chronically food insecure smallholder agricultural systems operating in Yatta Sub-county, Eastern Kenya, this paper explores how power dynamics between stakeholders can influence, and can be influenced by, participatory agricultural innovation initiatives. Findings suggest that there are often significant disparities in access to, and control over, platform resources between smallholder farmers and other stakeholder groups, resulting in large asymmetries. We discuss how these power dynamics may increase the risk of agricultural intervention, further marginalizing already disempowered groups and reinforcing power hierarchies to the detriment of smallholders. This study highlights the need for a deeper understanding of the institutional contexts that facilitate and maintain relationships of power within agricultural innovation systems, as well as the complexities associated with promoting transformational agricultural innovation.Sustainability 2020, 12, 461 2 of 21 break down barriers to the participation of small-scale farmers in platforms [9][10][11][12][13]. Agricultural innovation platforms have been defined as stakeholder linkages that are purposively created and maintained to address specific agricultural innovation challenges or opportunities [11,[14][15][16][17] within their institutional context [18]. Using innovation platforms to strengthen the social networks that link famers to diverse stakeholders in the agri-food system has the potential to facilitate the identification of collective interests and needs [11], promote greater trust and co-operation [7], and expose individuals to resources and adaptation strategies beyond the realm of their own experience [19,20]. Within smallholder and subsistence farming systems, innovation platforms are generally created through agricultural development initiatives, utilizing participatory and inclusive approaches in order to develop locally appropriate technologies [21] and ensure the equitable participation of all relevant stakeholder groups [22,23].Community-based interventions inherently entail trade-offs between stakeholder groups with varying degrees of power and interest [24], an issue often not well addressed in practice [1,9,[24][25][26]. According to Cullen et al. [1], existing power hierarchies may cause innovation platforms to fall short of their claims of inclusive, farmer-driven innovation, unless thorough consideration is given to issues of power [27]. The participation of smallholder far...

show abstract

Section: Empowerment Of Minority Coalitions For Learning and Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Platform, Participation, and Power: How Dominant and Minority Stakeholders Shape Agricultural Innovation

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The innovation systems approach was valuable in both identification of key leverage points in an already high performing system and the cohesive team approach to defining both questions and potential solutions. As intended, it did blur the boundaries between the scientists and the agricultural system stakeholders (Berthet et al 2018) and facilitated knowledge flows between a diversity of 'actors'. The co-innovation approach was supported by many 'layers' of farm data and led to agreement in targeting potential solutions in a complex high performing farm system where there were multiple leverage points that could drive change in the systems' performance.…”

Section: Innovation Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An innovation systems approach to understanding the impacts of grass grub damage in irrigated Canterbury dairy pastures

Zydenbos

Taylor

Yang

et al. 2019

Journal of NZ Grasslands

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An innovation systems approach involving agribusiness representatives, researchers and farmers identified that damage caused by grass grub (Costelytra giveni) was a key factor contributing to areas of reduced yield within high-producing pastures. Using a recognised yield mapping technique, areas of ‘Low’ and ‘High’ pasture height were identified in different paddocks over 3 years; ‘Low’ areas had significantly higher numbers of grass grub larvae than ‘High’ areas. Pasture production was measured for the ‘Low’ and ‘High’ pasture height areas, and the difference was calculated to be 6800 kg DM/ha for 2018/19. This difference persisted after grass grub larvae were no longer active. Farm systems modelling analysis estimated this ‘yield gap’ led to a $650/ha/year difference in profit. A survey of farmer perceptions of grass grub damage on 23 central Canterbury dairy farms estimated 19% of pastures were affected by grass grub, with 11% of the area in those paddocks being damaged. Econometric modelling showed differences in farmer perceptions of grass grub damage. Data from the survey and the pasture measurements were combined with the farm systems modelling results to estimate a $1,870,000/year regional-scale impact of the ‘yield gap’. An integrated pest management approach is suggested to control grass grub damage.

show abstract

“…In the context of designing more sustainable agricultural systems, and in view of paradigms such as circular economy, agroecology and smart or digital farming [19], there is a need to consider how existing co-design and co-innovation approaches in agriculture can be further opened. This includes a need to better understand, develop and validate novel design methods, tools and techniques capable of supporting both democratic and radical innovation, including concepts, behaviors and technologies among dispersed and autonomous entrepreneurs (farmers), as well as with other actors with diverging interests and complex power relationships [12,45].…”

Section: Sustainability and Agriculturementioning

confidence: 99%

Textile natural fibers production regarding the agroforestry approach

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As sustainability is becoming an important topic for both agriculture and the textile sector, there is an increasing market demand for plant-based fibers production. Diversified farming systems, such as agroforestry, have received considerable attention for their potential to contribute to more environmentally sustainable and socially just agricultural methods, that offers a smart use of water and soil nutrition. They can be a direction for rural development through contributions in agrobiodiversity, livelihood diversity, labor availability and economic growth. They are currently being promoted in many regions to contribute for food security, climate change adaptation and mitigation. In this study, the research methodology was based on a systematic literature review and secondary data collection and analyses. The aim was to investigate initiatives towards sustainable textile fibers cropping, including different species and plantation methods. The results indicate few cases worldwide and suggest cotton as the main experimented specie, generally cultivated with two other ones. They were identify three methods applied in cotton crops: (1) crop rotation, (2) agroecological intercropping and (3) agroforestry. Results also demonstrates different production challenges, concerning machinery development to mixture crops, ideal species groups, economic viability and process scalability. Forest management methods that can sustain good mixes of tree species need to be designed, promoting rich agrobiodiversity landscapes. Thus, defining, measuring and rewarding good farming practices are the main possible drivers to motivate farmers to change to new approaches towards sustainability in textile fiber production. Further investigation is demanded to evaluate different species possibilities and cropping maintenance, as well as addressing public policies and coordinating stakeholders interests.

show abstract

Opening design and innovation processes in agriculture: Insights from design and management sciences and future directions

Cited by 113 publications

References 55 publications

Platform, Participation, and Power: How Dominant and Minority Stakeholders Shape Agricultural Innovation

Platform, Participation, and Power: How Dominant and Minority Stakeholders Shape Agricultural Innovation

An innovation systems approach to understanding the impacts of grass grub damage in irrigated Canterbury dairy pastures

Textile natural fibers production regarding the agroforestry approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About