Innovation platforms (IPs) are a way of organizing multistakeholder interactions, marshalling ideas, people and resources to address challenges and opportunities embedded in complex settings. The approach has its roots in theories of complexity, the concept of innovation systems and practices of participatory action research. IPs have been widely adopted across Africa and beyond in recent years as a “must have” tool in a range of “for development” modes of agricultural research.
Se analizan los efectos de las interacciones, directas e indirectas, entre agricultores y otros actores relevantes en el intercambio de información y conocimiento para la innovación agrícola. Los datos se obtuvieron al preguntar a 120 agricultores «¿de quién aprende y/o a quién recurre para obtener información o conocimiento de cuestiones técnicas y productivas en torno a su unidad de producción?». Se emplean indicadores del análisis de redes sociales para proponer lineamientos que permitan catalizar la innovación agrícola.
Well-designed and supported innovation niches may facilitate transitions towards sustainable agricultural futures, which may follow different approaches and paradigms such as agroecology, local place-based food systems, vertical farming, bioeconomy, urban agriculture, and smart farming or digital farming.
This paper makes a contribution to understanding the impact of relational trust, as embodied within bonding, bridging and linking social capital, on rural innovation. Using cases of multi-stakeholder groups who work together on shared problems it explores how social capital and different forms of trust (companion, competence and commitment) influence rural innovation processes. Looking at both the ‘bright’ and ‘dark’ side of social capital, our focus is on how social capital and trust constrain and enable the process of innovation.
This paper makes a contribution to understanding the impact of relational trust, as embodied within bonding, bridging and linking social capital, on rural innovation. Using cases of multi-stakeholder groups who work together on shared problems it explores how social capital and different forms of trust (companion, competence and commitment) influence rural innovation processes. Looking at both the ‘bright’ and ‘dark’ side of social capital, our focus is on how social capital and trust constrain and enable the process of innovation.
On-farm agricultural innovation through incorporation of new technologies and practices requires access to resources such as knowledge, financial resources, training, and even emotional support, all of which require the support of different actors such as peers, advisors, and researchers. The literature has explored the support networks that farmers use and the overall importance ranking of different support actors, but it has not looked in detail at how these networks may differ for different farmers.
This paper comparatively analyzes the structure of agricultural policy development networks that connect organizations working on agricultural development, climate change and food security in fourteen smallholder farming communities across East Africa, West Africa and South Asia.
This paper examines the determinants of participation in an outsourced extension programs and its impact of smallholder farmers' net farm income in Msinga, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. A multi-stage sampling technique was used to obtain cross-sectional farm-level data from a sample of 300 farm households, using a structured questionnaire for the interview. The determinants and impacts of participation were estimated using the propensity score matching (PSM) to account for sample selection bias.
The paper is structured as follows. First, definitions and conceptualisations of trust are considered, before moving on review the literature on trust in rural network models of business support. Next, the empirical study design is described, which consisted of case studies of business advice programmes offered to artisanal food enterprises in Northern Ireland and displaying varying degrees of trust. The results of the empirical study are reported and then discussed, with reflections on how trust evolved in each case, and the ways in which trust was lost
Drawn from numerous sources, including papers in this journal, this concluding paper synthesizes evidence on the relationship between agricultural research for development and poverty reduction, with particular emphasis on agri-food systems perspectives in shaping programs aimed at rural prosperity. Following the introduction in section 1, we revisit the ex ante set of 18 pathways in section 2 (which were laid out in our introductory paper for this SI), posing some critical questions: Can a manageable set of impact pathways be identified? How are they inter-related?