Co-innovation can be effective for complex challenges-involving interactions amongst multiple stakeholders, viewpoints, perceptions, practices and interests across programmes, sectors and national systems. Approaches to challenges in the primary sector have tended to be linear, where tools and outputs are developed by a few, mostly scientists/researchers, and then extended to stakeholders. A co-innovation approach first deciphers and delineates the biophysical, societal, regulatory, policy, economic and environmental drivers, constraints and controls influencing these challenges at multiple levels. Second, stakeholder interactions and perspectives can inform and change the focus as well as help in co-developing solutions to deliver agreed outcomes. However, there is limited systematic and comparative research on how coinnovation works out in different projects. Here we analyse 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.
7As the pressure intensifies to reduce nitrogen (N) losses to the environment from pasture-based dairy 8 systems, interest in reducing N fertiliser inputs and returning to grass/clover mixtures, where more N 9 for pasture growth is supplied by biological N fixation (BNF), has been revived. However, the 10 question then arises: is BNF fundamentally different to fertiliser N with respect to N losses, especially 11 nitrate-N leaching risk? This paper addresses this question by reviewing empirical evidence in the 12 context of N cycling processes and the efficiency of N use for herbage production. Nitrate leaching 13 data from studies comparing different sward treatments at the same level of total N inputs (fertiliser 14 plus BNF) provide no evidence to suggest leaching differs when N is supplied solely by fixation in 15 mixtures, by fixation plus fertiliser in mixtures, or solely as fertiliser to grass monoculture. Increasing 16 clover content in mixed grass/clover pastures is likely to increase N leaching due to a lower ratio of 17 soluble sugar and starch (SSS) to N in herbage compared with the common companion grass species 18 perennial ryegrass, and therefore higher partitioning of N eaten to urine. Counteracting this effect, 19 mixed grass/clover pastures may offer some potential for increasing N use efficiency and reducing the 20 whole farm N surplus compared with grass-dominant pasture receiving relatively high rates of N 21 fertiliser. While there are undeniable benefits for the productivity of dairy systems from maintaining 22 strong grass/clover mixtures, it is the total amount of N entering the system, rather than the form of N 23 (BNF or fertiliser), that influences nitrate leaching rates. 24
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.