The term ‘systemic innovation’ is increasing in use. However, there is no consensus on its meaning: four different ways of using the term can be identified in the literature. Most people simply define it as a type of innovation where value can only be derived when the innovation is synergistically integrated with other complementary innovations, going beyond the boundaries of a single organization. Therefore, the term ‘systemic’ refers to the existence of a co-ordinated innovation system.

This paper addresses the under-researched issue of stakeholder identification and engagement in problem structuring interventions. A concise framework to aid critical reflection in the design and reporting of stakeholder identification and engagement is proposed. This is grounded in a critical-systemic epistemology, and is informed by social identity theory. We illustrate the utility of the framework with an example of a problem structuring workshop, which was part of a green innovation project on the development of a technology for the recovery of rare metals from steel slag.

Expertise in research integration and implementation is an essential but often overlooked component of tackling complex societal and environmental problems. We focus on expertise relevant to any complex problem, especially contributory expertise, divided into ‘knowing-that’ and ‘knowing-how.’ We also deal with interactional expertise and the fact that much expertise is tacit. We explore three questions.

The language of co-creation has become popular with policy makers, researchers and consultants wanting to support evidence-based change. However, there is little agreement about what features a research or consultancy project must have for peers to recognise the project as co-creative, and therefore for it to contribute to the growing body of practice and theory under that heading. This means that scholars and practitioners do not have a shared basis for critical reflection, improving practice and debating ethics, legitimacy and quality.

This editorial paper brings together different streams of research providing novel perspectives on co-design and co-innovation in agriculture, including methods, tools and organizations.

More and more, development organizations are under pressure to demonstrate that their programs result in significant and lasting changes in the well-being of their intended beneficiaries. However, such "impacts" are often the product of a confluence of events for which no single agency or group of agencies can realistically claim full credit. As a result, assessing development impacts is problematic, yet many organizations continue to struggle to measure results far beyond the reach of their programs

he agricultural sector is under increasing pressure to bridge a growing concern for hunger and economic deprivation. At the centre of discussion is increase in agricultural productivity at a scale increasingly complex. This complexity challenges the capacity of both extension workers, farmers, farming systems and even the environment. This means that what matters for agricultural development and achieving the above situation is the capability of people to be effective and productive economic agents. It is here that capacity building comes in.

The LIVES project works to increase adoption of value chain interventions through use of improved knowledge and capacity by value chain actors and service providers. Knowledge management and capacity development are important components of the project to fill gaps in knowledge and capacity of value chain actors and service providers. Capacity is defined as the capabilities (knowledge, skills, experience, values, motivations, organizational processes, and linkages) that determine how well value chain actors and service providers utilize resources, market opportunities, and relationships.

Climate change and climate variability are creating negative impacts to agriculture. It affects both food security and crop and livestock production. In the process, it affects the livelihood of communities. Climate-smart agriculture is seen as an alternative to mitigate the challenges of climate change. Literature studies were obtained from journal articles on capacity development. The problem investigated is that climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is a recent concept which needs to be understood with climate change, and the extension advisors do not have requisite skills.

Agricultural innovation is an essential component in achieving the SDG and accelerating the transition to more sustainable and resilient farming systems across the world. Innovations generally emerge from collective intelligence and action, which requires effective agricultural innovation systems (AIS). An AIS perspective has been widely adopted, but the analysis of AIS, especially at country level, remains a challenge. The need for and potential of a diagnostic tool for AIS analysis is currently receiving attention in the global agricultural policy debate.