What Does an Inventory of Recent Innovation Experiences Tell Us About Agricultural Innovation in Africa?

Abstract

Within the context of the FP7 JOLISAA project (JOint Learning in and about Innovation Systems in African Agriculture), an inventory of agricultural innovation experiences was developed in three African countries: Kenya, South Africa and Benin. The main objective was to assess a broad diversity of multi-stakeholder agricultural innovation processes involving smallholders. National teams used literature searches and interactions with a range of institutions and networks engaged in agricultural innovation to identify cases. Interviews with resource persons and field visits were also conducted to supplement the available / accessible documentation. The inventory was made according to a common analytical framework and guidelines inspired by the Innovation System perspective to allow for an analysis across cases and countries. The completed inventory includes 57 documented cases, covering a wide diversity of experiences, in terms of types, domains, scales and timelines of innovation. The 57 cases confirm previously documented features, such as the diversity of stakeholders involved in innovation, the diversity of innovation triggers, or also the frequent occurence of market driven innovation. It also illustrates more original features: the typically long time frames of innovation processes; the common occurrence of "innovation bundles" (a combination over time of technological, social and/or institutional innovations); and an often close relationship between innovation and externally-funded projects. National teams faced several challenges during the inventory process, including a common understanding and consistent use of key innovation-related concepts, and a difficult access to relevant information related partly to restrictions put by several case holders on sharing openly their experience. Out of the inventory, JOLISAA has selected thirteen cases which will undergo a subsequent phase of collaborative assessment. The assessment will strive to assess issues the inventory could not tackle, such as the actual roles and contributions of the various stakeholders, the dynamics of the innovation process, and the influence of the enabling environment on the innovation process and outcome.

The evolution of the MasAgro hubs: responsiveness and serendipity as drivers of agricultural innovation in a dynamic and heterogeneous context

“…The way these hubs have been developed and how the managers of these hubs have addressed emerging challenges and opportunities sheds light on the reality of shaping innovation approaches in the heterogeneous contexts of Latin America. More broadly, the paper aims to contribute to the ongoing debate on how pluralistic systems of advisory services and innovation support may deal with heterogeneity in farmers' situations and needs (Kilelu, Klerkx, and Leeuwis 2014), move from linear technology oriented to adaptive management and innovation-system approaches (Klerkx, Aarts, and Leeuwis 2010;Triomphe et al 2013), and what this implies for the multiple stakeholders involved in terms of competences, stakeholder identities and institutional settings to enable demand-driven and adaptive innovation approaches (Nettle, Brightling, and Hope 2013;Landini 2015;Minh et al 2014;Schut et al 2015).…”

“…This highlights the fact that innovations can 'follow path-dependent, contextually-shaped trajectories that unfold over time' resembling 'a process of muddling through, using the best ideas available at a given point in time and trying to move forward in a way that addresses certain social, economic and, increasingly, environmental aspirations' (Vamsidhar Reddy, Hall, and Sulaiman 2012). In other words, the evolution of agricultural innovation is more often one of metamorphosis, with the pace and direction of change dictated by the differing contexts in which agricultural transformation takes place (Klerkx, Aarts, and Leeuwis 2010;Triomphe et al 2013). Hence, Klerkx, Aarts, and Leeuwis (2010) refer to adaptive management to point out the need for innovating actors to react constantly to their context which they try to modify in their favor.…”

“…(Klerkx, Aarts, and Leeuwis 2010;Vamsidhar Reddy, Hall, and Sulaiman 2012;Triomphe et al 2013;Kilelu, Klerkx, and Leeuwis 2014;Totin et al 2015;Schut et al 2015). Some of these studies take a micro-level perspective by focusing, the interactions at the farmers level: on the demand-articulation (Kilelu, Klerkx, and Leeuwis 2014), or how intermediaries or brokers play a role in connecting the demand-side to the supply-side (Klerkx, Hall, and Leeuwis 2009;Kilelu, Klerkx, and Leeuwis 2014).…”

Innovating a system for producing and distributing hybrid oil palm seedlings to smallholder farmers in Benin

“…Multi-stakeholder platforms/groups are known as processes that bring together the main stakeholders to address an issue and to reach collective outcomes (GIZ, 2011). Through multistakeholder processes, different players collaborate, learn from each other and share knowledge (Triomphe et al, 2013). A part-time scientist Research Associate (RA), with a PhD in weed science and sociology, facilitated the IPs' and monitored the research processes.…”

“…The concept of innovation platform is increasingly used in interventions inspired by agricultural innovation system thinking, as a way of bringing together stakeholders from a sector to enable transformative change van Paassen et al, 2013). An IP is defined as 'a space for learning and change.…”