Application of an integrated systemic framework for analysing agricultural innovation systems and informing innovation policies: Comparing the Dutch and Scottish agrifood sectors

Lamprinopoulou, Chrysa; Renwick, Alan; Klerkx, Laurens; Hermans, Frans; Roep, D.

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2014.05.001

Cited by 137 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Brandt 2013;Klein 2014;Pohl and Hirsch Hadorn 2007) research approaches, innovation systems approaches (e.g. Lamprinopoulou et al 2014;Schut et al 2014aSchut et al , b, 2015aSpielman et al 2009), value chain approaches (e.g. Ashby et al 2012;Nang'ole et al 2011), landscape approaches (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systemic perspectives on scaling agricultural innovations. A review

Wigboldus

Klerkx

Leeuwis

et al. 2016

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

Self Cite

243

181

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural production involves the scaling of agricultural innovations such as disease-resistant and droughttolerant maize varieties, zero-tillage techniques, permaculture cultivation practices based on perennial crops and automated milking systems. Scaling agricultural innovations should take into account complex interactions between biophysical, social, economic and institutional factors. Actual methods of scaling are rather empirical and based on the premise of 'find out what works in one place and do more of the same, in another place'. These methods thus do not sufficiently take into account complex realities beyond the concepts of innovation transfer, dissemination, diffusion and adoption. As a consequence, scaling initiatives often do not produce the desired effect. They may produce undesirable effects in the form of negative spill-overs or unanticipated side effects such as environmental degradation, bad labour conditions of farm workers and loss of control of farming communities over access to genetic resources. Therefore, here, we conceptualise scaling processes as an integral part of a systemic approach to innovation, to anticipate on the possible consequences of scaling efforts. We propose a method that connects the heuristic framework of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions (MLP) to a philosophical 'modal aspects' framework, with the objective of elucidating the connectedness between technologies, processes and practices. The resultant framework, the PRactice-Oriented Multi-level perspective on Innovation and Scaling (PROMIS), can inform research and policymakers on the complex dynamics involved in scaling. This is illustrated in relation to three cases in which the framework was applied: scaling agro-ecological practices in Nicaragua, farmer field schools on cocoa cultivation in Cameroon and 'green rubber' cultivation in Southwest China.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systemic perspectives on scaling agricultural innovations. A review

Wigboldus

Klerkx

Leeuwis

et al. 2016

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

Self Cite

243

181

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They contributed to the work on system failure framework insights from MLP by adding the macro-level failures that address public policies designed to foster sustainable transformative change. This amendment captures systems as a whole, and involves an analysis of whether actions at the micro level sufficiently address the system transformation [19]. This is in line with the innovation systems academic tradition, in which the notion of "failures" has been used more commonly as a source when theorizing on how TIS mechanisms work.…”

Section: Theory: Systemic Failures Preventing Sustainable Transitionsmentioning

confidence: 76%

System Merits or Failures? Policies for Transition to Sustainable P and N Systems in The Netherlands and Finland

Hoppe¹,

Kuokkanen

Mikkilä

et al. 2016

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) cycles are absolutely vital in maintaining sustainable food systems. Human activities disturb the natural balance of these cycles by creating enormous additional nutrient fluxes, causing eutrophication of waterways and pollution in land systems. To tackle this problem, sustainable nutrient management is required. This paper addresses sustainable nutrient management in two countries: The Netherlands and Finland. We adopt a critical perspective on resource politics, especially towards opportunistic policy strategies for the pollutant management of N and P. Two research questions are considered. First, what are the key systemic and policy failures that occurred in the N and P systems in the Netherlands and Finland between 1970 and 2015? And second, which lessons can be drawn when addressing the policy responses in the two countries to cope with these failures? The cases are analyzed within Weber and Rohracher's framework that addresses "failures" preventing sustainable transitions. The results show that a number of failures occurred, besides market failures (over-exploitation of the commons, externalization of costs): lack of directionality, policy coordination, institutions, capabilities, infrastructure, demand articulation, and reflexivity. Policy responses in both countries resulted in ponderous policy frameworks that were adequate to tackle nutrient problems from the industrial sector and municipalities. However, both countries provided only a moderate response in terms of system-wide integrated policy frameworks to cope with sectoral-transcending issues. The agricultural use of N and P, in contrast to detergents, has not been subjected to strong regulatory measures.

show abstract

“…This is what prevents actors to co-create and innovate in the milk production environment and overcome the adverse effects of the activity. Given the above, it became clear the need in managing of the actors in these environment (LAMPRINOPOULOU et al, 2014;KILELU et al, 2013). This lack of management among the participants of the business environment prevents them to obtain substantial economic rewards.…”

Section: Barriers Limiting the Development Of Dairy Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Dairy Production Diagnosis From the Perspective of Business Ecosystem: State of the Art in 2016

Bonamigo

Ferenhof

Forcellini

2017

BJO&PM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the pursuit of identify ways for a better understanding the barriers of the dairy production system, we sought to diagnose them from the perspective of the business ecosystem concept, through a systematic literature review. Thus, we use content analysis to serve as the basis for analysis and discussion of the barriers of dairy production. Resulting a total of fifteen barriers, properly presented and discussed. In addition, we provide some insights to mitigate these barriers. The study presents contribution to the development of dairy production by providing assistance to develop strategies for producers’ cooperatives, government agencies, milk producers, hulling industries products from milk. Based on the perspective of the business ecosystem is possible to have a broader view of the scenario where dairy production occurs and recognize the barriers of dairy production system. And once identified these barriers, it is possible to devise strategies to eliminate or mitigate these barriers.

show abstract

Application of an integrated systemic framework for analysing agricultural innovation systems and informing innovation policies: Comparing the Dutch and Scottish agrifood sectors

Cited by 137 publications

References 39 publications

Systemic perspectives on scaling agricultural innovations. A review

Systemic perspectives on scaling agricultural innovations. A review

System Merits or Failures? Policies for Transition to Sustainable P and N Systems in The Netherlands and Finland

Dairy Production Diagnosis From the Perspective of Business Ecosystem: State of the Art in 2016

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About