In the AgriSpin project (2015-2017) fifteen organisations involved in innovation support tried to understand better how each of them made a difference in helping farmers to innovate. In principle, each partner organisation hosted a Cross Visits of 3 – 4 days, to present a number of interesting innovation cases in which it was involved. The visiting team, composed of colleagues from other partner organisations, interviewed key actors in each case, and gave feedback about pearls, puzzlings and proposals in these innovation processes.

It is adressed in this paper opportunities of Q Methodology for empirical agricultural innovation studies. In the systems perspective on innovation, multi-actor innovation networks are seen as a key strategy to successful innovation. Given the several types of actors involved, the scientific and policy literature points at the need for ‘innovation brokers’ to build capacity for collective innovation and prevent innovation network failures.

This paper presents results from an action research intervention aimed at strengthening the role of private sector advisers in the Australian agricultural extension system. Private sector advisers participating in the research identified a number of barriers to their effective inclusion in this system.

Successful cases of innovation invariably demonstrate a range of partnerships, alliances and network-like arrangements that connect together knowledge users, knowledge producers and others involved in enabling innovation in the market, policy and civil society arenas. With this comes the realisation that public agricultural research needs to strengthen links to a wider set of players from the private and civil society sectors and, of course, farmers themselves. Public agricultural extension services have traditionally played the role of linking farmers to technology.

 The Agro-innovation Broker (AIB) concept was introduced by the European Commission solely to increase the vast spread of innovative solutions in Agriculture. The concept can be perceived as an intermediary between the demand and supply of agricultural research and extension services. This paper’s results are derived from the international research work that aims to develop a training curriculum in the field of agricultural innovation services with effective materials to boost capacity building actions in Central and Eastern European Countries (CEE).

This thematic note discusses the role of innovation brokers in bridging communication gaps between various actors of innovation systems. On the basis of recent experience in the Netherlands, it outlines the success of brokers in finding solutions adapted to the needs of farmers and industry, and thus their positive impact on innovation adoption. This section also examines some issues on how brokers function, particularly with regard to balancing interests, funding their activities, and the role of government.

The process of knowledge brokering in the agricultural sector, where it is generally called agricultural extension, has been studied since the 1950s. While agricultural extension initially employed research push models, it gradually moved towards research pull and collaborative research models. The current agricultural innovation systems perspective goes beyond seeing research as the main input to change and innovation, and recognises that innovation emerges from the complex interactions among multiple actors and is about fostering combined technical, social and institutional change.

This book is the re-titled third edition of the widely used Agricultural Extension (van den Ban & Hawkins, 1988, 1996). Building on the previous editions,Communication for Rural Innovation maintains and adapts the insights and conceptual models of value today, while reflecting many new ideas, angles and modes of thinking concerning how agricultural extension is taught and carried through today.

Various authors have identified the potential relevance of innovation system approaches for inclusive innovation, that is, the means by which new goods and services are developed for and by the poor. However, it is still a question how best to operationalize this. Innovation platforms (IPs) represent an example of putting an inclusive innovation system approach into practice by bringing different types of stakeholders together to address issues of mutual concern and interest with a specific focus on the marginalized poor.

In this paper,  presented at the 12th European IFSA Symposium (Workshop: "Generating spaces for innovation in agricultural and rural development") in 2016, the authors assess the integration of new entrants to small-scale farming into agricultural knowledge and innovation systems (AKIS), in four study sites located on Europe’s periphery (Bulgaria, Poland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom).