Structural Conditions for Collaboration and Learning in Innovation Networks: Using an Innovation System Performance Lens to Analyse Agricultural Knowledge Systems

ABSTRACT Purpose: We investigate how the structural conditions of eight different European agricultural innovation systems can facilitate or hinder collaboration and social learning in multidisciplinary innovation networks. Methodology: We have adapted the Innovation System Failure Matrix to investigate the main barriers and enablers eight countries (England, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, The Netherlands and Switzerland). Findings: Results show some of the recent trends the AKS actors in these countries have experienced and how these have affected their potential to act as collaborators in multidisciplinary innovation networks. Lack of funds, combined with horizontal and vertical fragmentation and the lack of proper evaluation criteria for collaborative innovation networks are among the most important threats we found. Practical Implications: This study shows that each national AIS has some unique features. This means that the implementation of policies promoting collaboration and social learning (e.g. the European Innovation Partnerships and Operational Groups) should depend on a critical reflection of the existing structural elements of the AIS in each country and whether there is a need for inclusion of new actors, or whether certain innovations for collective goods should be promoted. Originality: The paper contributes to the ongoing discussion in the scientific literature on the advantages and disadvantages of privatization of extension and advisory services and the shift from thinking in terms of the traditional Agricultural Knowledge System towards a broader Agricultural Innovation System.

[1]  R. Burt Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital , 2005 .

[2]  Laurens Klerkx,et al.  Achievements and challenges of innovation co-production support initiatives in the Australian and Dutch dairy sectors: A comparative study , 2013 .

[3]  V. Gilsing,et al.  A system failure framework for innovation policy design , 2005 .

[4]  Jaap Frouws,et al.  The Contested Redefinition of the Countryside. An Analysis of Rural Discourses in The Netherlands , 1998 .

[5]  A. Wals,et al.  Student Attitudes Towards and Skills for Sustainable Development , 2014 .

[6]  G. Brunori,et al.  Towards a Better Conceptual Framework for Innovation Processes in Agriculture and Rural Development: From Linear Models to Systemic Approaches , 2009 .

[7]  J. Ekboir,et al.  From Best Practice to Best Fit: A Framework for Designing and Analyzing Pluralistic Agricultural Advisory Services Worldwide , 2009 .

[8]  David J. Spielman,et al.  An innovation systems perspective on strengthening agricultural education and training in sub-Saharan Africa , 2008 .

[9]  David J. Spielman,et al.  Strengthening Agricultural Education and Training in sub-Saharan Africa from an Innovation Systems Perspective: A Case Study of Mozambique , 2008 .

[10]  Chris Garforth,et al.  Fragmentation or creative diversity? Options in the provision of land management advisory services , 2003 .

[11]  Jochen Markard,et al.  Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework , 2008 .

[12]  M. Hekkert,et al.  Innovation Studies Utrecht ( ISU ) Working Paper Series Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems : a framework for policy makers and innovation scholars , 2011 .

[13]  Helen Hambly Odame,et al.  Multi-stakeholder deliberation on dialectical divides: an operational principle of the systems of innovation , 2006 .

[14]  Paul C. Struik,et al.  Improving Potato Production in Kenya, Uganda and Ethiopia: A System Diagnosis , 2009, Potato Research.

[15]  Dirk Roep,et al.  Application of an integrated systemic framework for analysing agricultural innovation systems and informing innovation policies: Comparing the Dutch and Scottish agrifood sectors , 2014 .

[16]  C. Edquist Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations , 1997 .

[17]  K. Poppe,et al.  Transitions towards sustainable agriculture and food chains in peri-urban areas , 2009 .

[18]  C. Leeuwis,et al.  Learning towards system innovation. Evaluating a systemic instrument , 2010 .

[19]  Networks as Policy Instruments for Innovation , 2014 .

[20]  W. M. Rivera,et al.  Enhancing coordination among AKIS/RD actors: An analytical and comparative review of country studies on agricultural knowledge and information systems for rural development (AKIS/RD) , 2005 .

[21]  G. Nemes,et al.  Old institutions, new challenges: the agricultural knowledge system in Hungary , 2013 .

[22]  C. Leeuwis,et al.  Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment , 2010 .

[23]  Julie Ingram,et al.  CAP Reform and Innovation: The Role of Learning and Innovation Networks , 2013 .

[24]  Tony Sorensen,et al.  Australian agricultural R&D and innovation systems , 2011 .

[25]  A. Koutsouris,et al.  Extension systems and change facilitation for agricultural and rural development , 2012 .

[26]  G. Ahuja Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study , 1998 .

[27]  H. Moschitz,et al.  The challenges of innovation for sustainable agriculture and rural development: Integrating local actions into European policies with the Reflective Learning Methodology , 2014 .

[28]  C. Leeuwis,et al.  Advances in Knowledge Brokering in the Agricultural Sector: Towards Innovation System Facilitation , 2012 .

[29]  J. Ingram,et al.  Learning in the Permaculture Community of Practice in England: An Analysis of the Relationship between Core Practices and Boundary Processes , 2014 .

[30]  Bengt-Åke Lundvall,et al.  National Systems of Innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning London: Pint , 1995 .

[31]  J. Hellin Agricultural Extension, Collective Action and Innovation Systems: Lessons on Network Brokering from Peru and Mexico , 2012 .

[32]  Tugrul Temel,et al.  Mapping organisational linkages in the agricultural innovation system of Azerbaijan , 2004 .

[33]  Pieter J. Beers,et al.  The distribution of roles and functions for upscaling and outscaling innovations in agricultural innovation systems , 2013 .

[34]  Tom Veldkamp,et al.  Social learning inside and outside transition projects: Playing free jazz for a heavy metal audience , 2014 .

[35]  Dirk Roep,et al.  Learning and Innovation Networks for Sustainable Agriculture: Processes of Co-evolution, Joint Reflection and Facilitation , 2015 .

[36]  Pieter J. Beers,et al.  The contested redefinition of a sustainable countryside: revisiting Frouws' Rurality Discourses , 2010 .

[37]  F. Tödtling,et al.  One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach , 2005 .

[38]  Jacky Swan,et al.  The politics of networked innovation , 2005 .

[39]  B. J. Regeer,et al.  Making the invisible visible: Analysing the development of strategies and changes in knowledge production to deal with persistent problems in sustainable development , 2010 .

[40]  C. Laurent,et al.  Agricultural Extension Services and Market Regulation: Learning from a Comparison of Six EU Countries , 2006 .