Achievements and challenges of innovation co-production support initiatives in the Australian and Dutch dairy sectors: A comparative study

Policymakers and innovation scholars share an increasing interest in how to operationalize innovation support given the increasing number and range of stakeholders engaged in co-producing innovation. Using comparative case study analysis, this article examines support initiatives for dairy sector innovation in The Netherlands and Australia, addressing common challenges such as environmental issues, cattle health, new technology, and human resources. To this end, a review was conducted of documented information and articles published on the initiatives. The qualitative analysis focused on how the co-production process was supported and the achievements and challenges associated with each case. Across both countries and between different initiatives, the main achievements were found to be the generation of very different ideas addressing dairy sector challenges and attempting to bridge public and private sector interests. The main challenges included maintaining effort and momentum for high ambition targets and the potential for duplication as stakeholders became enrolled in different initiatives sponsored by different organizations in an increasingly devolved institutional setting. Furthermore, without strong institutional support for innovation co-production processes, individual actors were less able to operate effectively in innovation co-production roles. It is concluded that dairy sector innovation policies should address institutional constraints (e.g. provision of leadership and rewards for involvement in co-production processes), recognize that facilitation of innovation co-production needs to be adequately resourced, enhance support for initiative coordination to avoid duplication of effort, and take into account the specific institutional setting of countries and sectors to guide the design of innovation co-production support initiatives.

[1]  R. Nettle,et al.  Water Security: How Can Extension Work with Farming Worldviews? , 2010 .

[2]  L. Klerkx Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: insights from the Dutch agricultural sector , 2009 .

[3]  W. J. Fulkerson,et al.  Opportunities for future Australian dairy systems: a review , 2005 .

[4]  G. Dijk,et al.  Governance of innovation in animal production: new roles for science, business and the public sector , 2001 .

[5]  Laurens Klerkx,et al.  Operationalizing Demand-Driven Agricultural Research: Institutional Influences in a Public and Private System of Research Planning in The Netherlands , 2009 .

[6]  Nico Heerink,et al.  Evolution and challenges of dairy supply chains: Evidence from supermarkets, industries and consumers in Ethiopia , 2010 .

[7]  H. Chesbrough The Era of Open Innovation , 2003 .

[8]  R. Monaghan,et al.  Issues and options for future dairy farming in New Zealand , 2007 .

[9]  Laurens Klerkx,et al.  Building knowledge systems for sustainable agriculture: supporting private advisors to adequately address sustainable farm management in regular service contacts , 2010 .

[10]  Mark Paine,et al.  Aligning farm decision making and genetic information systems to improve animal production: methodology and findings from the Australian dairy industry , 2010 .

[11]  J. Jiggins Inter-active R, D&E , 2001 .

[12]  Andreas Neef,et al.  Stakeholder participation in agricultural research projects: a conceptual framework for reflection and decision-making , 2011 .

[13]  E. Hippel Democratizing innovation: The evolving phenomenon of user innovation , 2009 .

[14]  M. Meuwissen,et al.  Scenarios for a future dairy chain in the Netherlands , 2009 .

[15]  T. Metze Keep out of the dairy gateway: Boundary work in deliberative governance in Wisconsin, USA , 2008 .

[16]  C. Leeuwis,et al.  Shaping Collective Functions in Privatized Agricultural Knowledge and Information Systems: The Positioning and Embedding of a Network Broker in the Dutch Dairy Sector , 2009 .

[17]  O. Gassmann,et al.  Minimizing Market Risks Through Customer Integration in New Product Development: Learning from Bad Practice , 2005 .

[18]  R.H.M. Bergevoet,et al.  Improving the Entrepreneurial Competencies of Dutch Dairy Farmers through the Use of Study Groups , 2006 .

[19]  J. Sumberg Systems of innovation theory and the changing architecture of agricultural research in Africa , 2005 .

[20]  C. Negro,et al.  The role of collaborative partnerships in industry innovation: lessons from New Zealand's dairy sector , 2010 .

[21]  James Sumberg,et al.  Agricultural research in the face of diversity, local knowledge and the participation imperative: theoretical considerations , 2003 .

[22]  Developing new veterinary services in milk quality: A review of a recent mastitis risk management co-development in Australia , 2011, New Zealand veterinary journal.

[23]  Sylwia Męcfal Recenzja książki. Robert K. yin, Case Study Research. Design and Methods (fourth Edition), thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2009 , 2012 .

[24]  S. F. Spoelstra,et al.  Practices for reflexive design: lessons from a Dutch programme on sustainable agriculture , 2004 .

[25]  Paine,et al.  Networks of practice for co-construction of agricultural decision support systems: Case studies of precision dairy farms in Australia , 2012 .

[26]  S. Jasanoff Science and citizenship: a new synergy , 2004 .

[27]  Paine,et al.  Encounters with Knowledge Entrepreneurs and 'Sticky' Knowledge Transfer: Case Study Project 3030 , 2009 .

[28]  C. Leeuwis,et al.  Strengthening Agricultural Innovation Capacity: Are Innovation Brokers the Answer? , 2009 .

[29]  Building capacity in collective action: learning from dairy industry workforce planning and action in Australia , 2010 .

[30]  R. Yin Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[31]  S. Snapp,et al.  Realigning research and extension to focus on farmers’ constraints and opportunities , 2003 .

[32]  R. Nettle,et al.  Farms and Learning Partnerships in Farming Systems Projects: A Response to the Challenges of Complexity in Agricultural Innovation , 2007 .

[33]  J. Mitchell,et al.  Case and Situation Analysis , 1983 .

[34]  Paul Williams,et al.  The Competent Boundary Spanner , 2002 .

[35]  A. P. Bos,et al.  Reflexive Interactive Design and its Application in a Project on Sustainable Dairy Husbandry Systems , 2009 .

[36]  Laurens Klerkx,et al.  Evolution of systems approaches to agricultural innovation: concepts, analysis and interventions , 2012 .

[37]  N. Röling,et al.  An innovation systems approach to institutional change: Smallholder development in West Africa , 2012 .

[38]  T. Reardon,et al.  Private and public milk standards in Argentina and Brazil , 2005 .

[39]  Edward Toomer,et al.  Qualitative Methods in Management Research , 1989 .

[40]  B.M.A. Kroonen-Backbier,et al.  The nucleus and pilot farm research approach: experiences from The Netherlands , 2005 .

[41]  S. Ollila,et al.  Exploring the field of open innovation , 2009 .

[42]  J. Oenema,et al.  Guiding commercial pilot farms to bridge the gap between experimental and commercial dairy farms; the project ‘Cows & Opportunities’ , 2001 .

[43]  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 .

[44]  C. Leeuwis Communication for Rural Innovation: Rethinking Agricultural Extension , 2004 .

[45]  S. R. Teixeira,et al.  Participatory approach for the identification of dairy industry needs in the design of research, development and extension actions: Australian and Brazilian case studies , 2004 .

[46]  Zohra Bouamra-Mechemache,et al.  Demand for dairy products in the EU , 2008 .

[47]  Nadine Roijakkers,et al.  Exploring the Impact of Open Innovation on National Systems of Innovation – A Theoretical Analysis , 2011 .

[48]  E. Wielinga,et al.  Language and Tools for Networkers , 2009 .

[49]  M. Boland,et al.  Milk and dairy products in the 21st century. Prepared for the 50th anniversary of the journal of agricultural and food chemistry. , 2002, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[50]  D. Gibbon,et al.  Farming Systems Research into the 21st Century: The New Dynamic , 2012, Springer Netherlands.

[51]  M. Vaarst,et al.  Danish stable schools for experiential common learning in groups of organic dairy farmers. , 2007, Journal of dairy science.

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

[53]  André Devaux,et al.  Collective action for market chain innovation in the Andes , 2009 .

[54]  Laurens Klerkx,et al.  Matching demand and supply in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure: Experiences with innovation intermediaries , 2008 .