Developing partnerships to promote local innovation

The effects of a participatory approach on the adoption of agricultural technology: Focusing on the social network structure in rural Ethiopia

“…Firstly, it is diffi cult to generalise a given PRE practice, as technologies innovated through the PRE are locally developed to fi t particular biophysical and socio-economic settings and usually cannot be transferred in exactly the same forms to other settings, notably, to the highly varied environments in which many poor farmers live (Waters-Bayer et al, 2004). Secondly, there is a power difference between stakeholders; in particular, the gender issue is important.…”

“…However, many studies have found that such interventions through formal research institutions generally do not necessarily provide farmers with more secure access to new technologies or improve their livelihoods (Van de Fliert and Braun, 2002;Waters-Bayer et al, 2004;Hoffmann et al, 2007). In particular, agricultural research in Africa has failed to provide useful outputs to poor smallscale producers (Mosley, 2002;Sumberg and Reece, 2004;Breisinger et al, 2011).…”

“…Several theoretical studies have explored the advantages of the PRE approach (Leeuwis, 2000;Van de Fliert and Braun, 2002;Mog, 2004;Waters-Bayer et al, 2004). Hellin et al (2008) suggested that the use of participatory approaches is one way to enhance rural innovation capacity, where such approaches may involve increased accessibility by farmers to externally developed technology, the joint development of relevant and appropriate technology by farmers and scientists, or the enhancement of local capacity to address problems and devise solutions.…”