This report shows some initial results about the research project entitled GlobalOrg, on a Brazilian case study, investigating the sustainability of tropical fruit organic farming in a global food chains perspective. It was performed an analysis about the production strategies of certified units of a familiar smalholders cooperative from Itápolis-SP-Brazil.

This text analyses the development of organic farming in Brazil. It shows the great variability of social models of organic production recognised by Brazilian Law: organic, agroecological, ecological or biodynamic agriculture, permaculture etc.. It depicts how the political and social concerns in the spheres of family farming and environment caused the reorganisation of production systems, in the agricultural practices and n the new relationships with the market and with natural resources.

Family farms are by far the most numerous component of the agricultural sector in the Brazilian Amazon. However socially vital for the development of the region, these small landholdings' agricultural and cattle ranching activities frequently overdraw and degrade natural resources, threatening important ecosystem services. Predominant agricultural practices have been marked by shifting cultivation, with intense use of fire and low productivity, causing high rate of destruction of natural forests.

Le développement de l'agriculture organique au Brésil prend des formes multiples. Au travers de leur expérience de l'AO, dans une communauté proche de trois métropoles, de petits maraîchers d'Ibiúna (São Paulo) créent des entités collectives et expérimentent de nouvelles pratiques sociales.

In this paper its argued that when flexibly applied and adapted to capture dynamics typical in systems innovation projects, the Log Frame Approach (LFA) ( and logical frameworks have considerable utility to support evaluation for both learning and accountability, and for identifying and addressing institutional logics, which leads to system innovation.

Primary Innovation is a five year collaborative initiative demonstrating and evaluating co-innovation, a systemic approach to innovation addressing complex problems, in five ‘innovation projects’ (active case studies) in different agricultural industries. In defining the elements of co-innovation, Primary Innovation has emphasised nine principles which guide activity in the innovation projects.

This paper describes a process for stimulating this engagement to develop a shared understanding of systemic problems, challenge prevalent institutional logics, and identify individual and collective actions that change agents might undertake to stimulate system innovation. To achieve this the process included (i) multiple actors from the agricultural innovation systems, (ii) steps to prompt reflexivity to challenge underlying institutional logics, (iii) an iterative process of practical experimentation to challenge current practices, and (iv) actions to encourage generative collaboration.

This study identifies systemic problems in the New Zealand Agricultural Innovation System (AIS) that affect the ability of participants in the agricultural sectors to co-develop technologies. We integrate structural and functional streams of innovation system enquiry, gathering data through 30 semi-structured interviews with individuals in Government, industry and research. Interviews explored perceptions of the influence of actors, interactions, institutions, infrastructure, and market structure on the effectiveness of AIS functions.

In this article it is analysed the results of applying a co-innovation approach to five research projects in the New Zealand primary sector. The projects varied in depth and breadth of stakeholder engagement, availability of ready-made solutions, and prevalence of interests and conflicts. The projects show how and why co-innovation approaches in some cases contributed to a shared understanding of complex problems. Our results confirm the context-specificity of co-innovation practices

This paper details the analytical framework used for developing a nested understanding of systemic innovation capacity in an AIS. The paper then introduces the two case studies, along with the data and methods of analysis, followed by a presentation of the results as timelines of configurations of capabilities at different levels of the AIS.