This chapter reports on the different functions fulfilled by existing mechanisms for supporting collective innovation in the agricultural and agrifood sectors in the countries of the Global South in order to identify the potential contributions the research community can make to strengthen them. The authors show that a variety of mechanisms are needed to create enabling conditions for innovation and to provide a step-by-step support to innovation communities, according to their capacities and learning needs.

This presentation sets out a future research agenda for research on agricultural extension and advisory services, under influence of sustainability transitions and disruptive technologies such as digital agriculture technology, and synthetic foods. For a recording of the presentation see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03V7zSD63pw

Recently, increasing attention has been paid to intermediaries, actors connecting multiple other actors, in transition processes. Research has highlighted that intermediary actors (e.g. innovation funders, energy agencies, NGOs, membership organisations, or internet discussion forums) operate in many levels to advance transitions. The authors argue that intermediation, and the need for it, varies during the course of transition. Yet, little explicit insight exists on intermediation in different transition phases.

Intermediary actors have been proposed as key catalysts that speed up change towards more sustainable socio-technical systems. Research on this topic has gradually gained traction since 2009, but has been complicated by the inconsistency regarding what intermediaries are in the context of such transitions and which activities they focus on, or should focus on. This study briefly elaborates on the conceptual foundations of the studies of intermediaries in transitions, and how intermediaries have been connected to different transition theories.

Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is increasingly seen as a promising approach to feed the growing world population under climate change. The review explored how institutional perspectives are reflected in the CSA literature. In total, 137 publications were analyzed using institutional analysis framework, of which 55.5% make specific reference to institutional dimensions. While the CSA concept encompasses three pillars (productivity, adaptation, and mitigation), the literature has hardly addressed them in an integrated way.

Innovation Platforms are increasingly being proposed and used in agricultural research for development project and programs. Innovation Platforms provide space to farmers, agricultural service providers, researchers, private sector and other stakeholders to jointly identify, analyse and overcome constraints to agricultural development. Although innovation platforms have been successful in addressing agricultural challenges, there is a risk that they are promoted as a panacea for all problems in the agricultural sector... which would clearly be a big mistake.

This paper seeks to contribute to a better understanding of the complex dynamics that shape the contribution of research to policy and innovation processes that address ‘competing claims’ on natural resources and their management.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic will vary for different groups of rural population, with the highest impact expected to be on farmers and other vulnerable groups, especially women and youth. Targeted support is feasible only by activating a network of actors or organizations within agricultural innovation systems (AIS) and promoting customized technologies and practices suitable for location specific contexts.

This article proposes a novel conceptualization of knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship, which can capture the main characteristics of a vital phenomenon in the modern economy. Our conceptualization is based upon the integration of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems approach. It consists of a theoretical definition and a stylized process model.

In organizations, mandated adoption contexts are the rule rather than the exception. Individuals, who are denied the choice between adopting and rejecting an innovation, are more likely to engage in opposition behavior, particularly if the innovation conflicts with their held beliefs. Interestingly, neither the construct of forced adoption nor its consequences have received much research attention. To address this gap, was conducted a systematic literature review and provide theoretical rationales for the emergence of innovation resistance and opposition behaviors in organizations.