Revealing power dynamics and staging conflicts in agricultural system transitions: Case studies of innovation platforms in New Zealand

Turner, James A.; Horita, Akiko; Fielke, Simon; Klerkx, Laurens; Blackett, Paula; Bewsell, Denise; Small, Bruce; Boyce, W.M.

doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.04.022

Cited by 58 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As stated by Turner et al (2020), it is a challenge to include incumbent actors in possible partnerships with new cooperative models, to a point that the very same actors define "new role perceptions and power relations." Dialogue may foster awareness about complementarity (results, sections Membership and Interactions With External Business Partners) and an alignment on definitions and goals (Forney and Häberli, 2017).…”

Section: Organizationalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is, in a way, an integrative exercise for stakeholders to approach themselves as part of a multifunctional construct of a variety of innovation systems, whose combination may pave the way toward a more diverse and sustainable dairy sector (Pigford et al, 2018). Dialogue requires a culture of cooperation and a consciousness about the power dynamics that may unfold due to differences of scale (results, sections Membership and Interactions With External Business Partners) or that hamper the actors' empowerment to act in a certain direction (Avelino and Rotmans, 2011;Avelino and Wittmayer, 2016;Forney and Häberli, 2017;Turner et al, 2020). Finally yet importantly, dialogue may help consider common goals, for example in terms of research and development, consumers' information, and adapted structures of storage and distribution (results section Interactions With External Business Partners) mutually beneficial in terms of long-term economic development.…”

Section: Organizationalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The objective of studies on coexistence is to understand how dynamic and progressive interactions may define pathways of transition, as opposed to radical ruptures (Touzard and Fournier, 2014;Saux-Nogues, 2018). In that line of study, approaches emerging from Transition Management and Sustainable Niche Management (Ingram et al, 2015;Elzen and Bos, 2019) and recent studies on Agricultural Innovation Systems (Pigford et al, 2018;Turner et al, 2020) focus, for example, on interaction dynamics between agents. Their objective is to understand how agricultural innovations anchor themselves in the incumbent agricultural regime.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the recent literature on transitions in the dairy sector, attention has been devoted to the role of dairy cooperatives, and more broadly of dairy industries, in transition processes. The authors focused on their interactions with other stakeholders and the institutional changes needed to address issues of the environmental impact of farming systems (Farstad et al, 2020;Runhaar et al, 2020;Turner et al, 2020;Vermunt et al, 2020). The authors also approached how medium-sized dairy cooperatives may support a regional farming model through specialization in added value productions (Heidkamp and Morrissey, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Coexistence of Cooperative Models as Structural Answer to Lock-Ins in Diversification Pathways: The Case of the Walloon Dairy Sector

Herde

Baret

Maréchal

2020

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on an analysis of the Walloon dairy sector, this paper aims at bringing novel insights on the coexistence issue in agrifood transition studies. Whereas most studies explore the coexistence of farm models, our study focuses on value chains, in particular on cooperatives. In the Walloon Region, new dairy cooperatives emerged, as substitute or as complement to the incumbent vertically integrated dairy cooperatives. This paper focuses on the coexistence of dairy cooperative models as enabler of transition toward product diversification. Dairy cooperatives are hybrid actors: economic agents on the market on the one hand, structure of collective agency on the other hand. Williamson's framework of New Institutional Economics acknowledges that the allocation of resources by cooperatives depends on governance processes and on the wider institutional context in which the cooperatives evolve. Within the broader frame of the Multi-Level Perspective, this approach allows to consider the socio-technical coherence in which the cooperatives evolve, the effects of this coherence on their pathways of development, and the complementarity of the cooperative models. This qualitative analysis builds on semi-directed interviews with actors of the Walloon dairy sector. The results outline distinctions between the new cooperative models and mainstream dairy cooperatives in market approach, definition of milk quality, distribution of added value, governance, and interactions with partners. Both models evolve within a distinct socio-technical coherence, holding, in the case of the mainstream dairy cooperatives, lock-ins to diversification related to the relationship with the farmer-members and the milk they produce in the industrial vertically integrated model. The new cooperative models circumvent these lock-ins through de-integration and externalization of initiatives, remuneration, and risk. They allow specific groups of actors—still related or unrelated to the mainstream dairy cooperative—to explore new market pathways in accordance with their potential, and to mutually agree on criteria qualifying milk. This research draws the picture of a possible reconfiguration of the dairy landscape toward a more diversified ecosystem of actors and invites to consider structures of governance in collective action as a cornerstone issue, because of their significant role in terms of enablement, coexistence, and complementarity throughout the transition process.

show abstract

Section: Organizationalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Organizationalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Coexistence of Cooperative Models as Structural Answer to Lock-Ins in Diversification Pathways: The Case of the Walloon Dairy Sector

Herde

Baret

Maréchal

2020

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These arise from competing values and different desired end-goals, held by different legitimate stakeholders in the research process or intervention. Value conflicts must also be revealed and addressed through the transdisciplinary research framework (Ingram, Gaskell, Mills, Dwyer 2020;Turner et al 2020a).…”

Section: Integration and Implementation Science Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-innovation and Integration and Implementation Sciences: Measuring their research impact - examination of five New Zealand primary sector case studies

Small

Robson-Williams

Payne

et al. 2021

NJAS: Impact in Agricultural and Life Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Primary Innovation programme investigated co-innovation to solve complex agricultural problems in five New Zealand primary sector projects. The projects engaged diverse stakeholders using a collaborative, integrative process to co-define problems, and co-create and implement solutions. Each project included a Reflexive Monitor, who facilitated group relationships, encouraged a systems perspective, and integration of multiple disciplinary and stakeholder knowledges. Reflexive Monitors also encouraged reflexive practice and adaptive project management, while helping the team pursue the project ambition for change. This paper, with respect to the five projects, seeks to address the following research question: Is co-innovation an effective research approach for achieving societal impact from innovations? To address this question, we describe attempts to operationalise and measure co-innovation through 1) five behavioural principles of co-innovation, 2) Reflexive Monitors' focus on each principle, and 3) the presence or absence of elements of the Integration and Implementation Sciences Framework (i2S) for enhancing research impact. We evaluate the relationship between these three process measures and project success, measured by outputs and two proxy impact measures: participants' subjective comparisons with the counterfactual and anticipated achievement of desired long-term impacts. Results indicated that the five principles of co-innovation and the presence or absence of elements defined in the i2S framework were positively related to the three success measures. This suggests validity of these measurement tools, and of using a co-innovation approach and/or systematic attention to the elements of the i2S framework to enhance the processes, outcomes and impacts of projects tackling complex real-world problems. KEYWORD Complex problems; co-innovation; transdisciplinary; integration and implementation sciences; collaboration; process measures; impact measures CONTACT James Turner

show abstract

System lacks systems thinking: Top‐down organization and actor agency in China's agricultural extension system

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extension of agricultural technology is important for farmers to improve their practices. However, criticisms are made of top‐down extension systems, which fail to meet smallholder farmers' needs due to reliance on a linear, one‐way transfer approach. Meanwhile, the role of farmers' knowledge is gaining attention in the academic literature on agricultural extension, but yet overlooked in the applied Chinese context. These issues require a holistic analysis, towards, which systems principles can provide insights. We present a case study of the interaction between the national extension system and smallholder farmers in Guangxi, China. We found that the system constrains the autonomy and capacity of extension officers in implementing activities. Also, farmers actively exercise agency in identifying and responding to farming issues. We argue that the system should build the adaptive capacity of officers and farmers by fostering systems thinking to enable smallholder farmers to tackle farming complexity in a changing world.

show abstract

Revealing power dynamics and staging conflicts in agricultural system transitions: Case studies of innovation platforms in New Zealand

Cited by 58 publications

References 60 publications

Coexistence of Cooperative Models as Structural Answer to Lock-Ins in Diversification Pathways: The Case of the Walloon Dairy Sector

Coexistence of Cooperative Models as Structural Answer to Lock-Ins in Diversification Pathways: The Case of the Walloon Dairy Sector

Co-innovation and Integration and Implementation Sciences: Measuring their research impact - examination of five New Zealand primary sector case studies

System lacks systems thinking: Top‐down organization and actor agency in China's agricultural extension system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About