Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D02430
Notes:
Page 54 - Abstract of a paper presented at the International Conference of the Australasia Pacific Extension Network (APEN), Lincoln University, Christchurch, New Zealand, August 26-28, 2013. 100 pages.
12 pages, via online journal, Since the rice crisis of 2007, the government of Benin has initiated many programmes for rice intensification. Comparison of three rice production areas shows that local rice production has indeed been increased by the facilities provided by the government programmes. Although broadly the same facilities (market outlet, credit, input, etc.) were provided to rice farmers in the three study areas, which are located close to one another, there are not only similar, but also some different outcomes with regard to farmers' practices. There were also some unexpected changes, like the shift from limited collective canal cleaning to individual canal cleaning in Koussin-Lélé and the use of pumps in upland areas in Bamè. The study explores the interplay between these external interventions of government programmes and local actions of farmers to explain the outcomes. Using an actor-oriented perspective, the study concludes that farmers' agency played a critical role in the success of interventions; the changes occurred because of local actions of the farmers and intermediaries interacting with the external interventions at diverse junctures. Differences in strategies for resolving livelihood problems, in production options and biophysical conditions influence farmers' local actions and contribute to the explanation of the diversity of outcomes. The main lesson drawn from this research is that evaluation studies should not consider external interventions as the only or primary source of change. The dynamic interplay between local agency, intermediation and external interventions makes room for change.
21 pages, via online journal, Purpose: This article outlines the emergence of programme teams in the Australian dairy farm sector as a response to counter weaknesses in the institutional environment for agricultural innovation which favours technology adoption/diffusion approaches.
Design/methodology/approach: The strengths, weaknesses and risks of different approaches to innovation in the Australian dairy sector RD&E system are analysed and key features of an emerging programme team approach defined. The programme team approach is compared and contrasted with the features of innovation capacity from international literature. An analysis of the relative investment in this innovation capacity in different topics or domains of dairy innovation is provided.
Findings: The programme team approach to innovation involves groups of researchers, extension people, public and private organisations, farmers, community groups, and policy and service groups brought together to progress innovation and change in a topic area or domain. Leadership of the process is provided by an area expert or champion. The team takes responsibility for: (a) understanding the businesses of key players who have an influence in the innovation or domain; (b) deciding the nature of the desired change that all stakeholders can align to; (c) identifying features of the enabling environment to establish what capacity is needed; (d) designing a ‘route to change’ strategy (in contrast to traditional route-to-market thinking); and (e) piloting and refining the approach within the target populations. The group manages emerging risks and keeps on top of issues, as well as identifies any knowledge gaps for research that are preventing innovation and change.
Conclusions/practical implications: The programme team approach provides a semi-formal governance mechanism for innovation to develop, despite an institutional environment that favours technology adoption. Further, the activities of programme teams consist of practices which integrate research-led and demand-pull approaches. Currently, investment in such innovation capacity is relatively low and highly variable across different topic domains.
Added value: The article provides tangible activities that managers of agricultural RD&E programmes can invest in to progress systemic approaches to innovation and is a guide for agricultural education and extension practitioners to proceed in their innovation work.
Liang, Chyi-Lyi (author) and Pescatore, Matthew (author)
Format:
Paper
Publication Date:
2014-05
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 127 Document Number: D02725
Notes:
Paper presented at the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association joint AAEA/EAAE/CAES symposium: Social networks, social media and the economics of food, Montreal, Canada, May 29-30, 2014. 19 pages.
