Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. summary: Agricultural innovations are meant to master global challenges such as climate change. However, they are often subject to highly controversial societal debates, such as in the case of genetic engineering or certain forms of animal production. This paper provides insight in the extent to which these conflicts are rooted in the conditions and processes of agricultural innovation. We analyze the German agricultural innovation system from an adapted systems perspective and present three case studies. These case studies potentially contribute to solving current challenges and are influenced in their development process by different factors: different technologies, actors, links to other branches, overlapping frame conditions and current challenges as well as societal debates. The innovation system concept applied to different system levels provides insight into interrelationships and hence allows us to identify starting points for improvement. The explanation and potential solution in mastering the high expectations on agricultural innovation and societal debates the authors point to two aspects: 1) As it is in many other areas trust is an important basis for innovative collaboration in small networks. (2) At the same time innovation success depends on the incorporation of societal trends in innovation processes, e. g. via a greater involvement of consumers and retailers at an early stage. Overall, besides the balancing of continuity and openness of agricultural innovation networks, our results raise questions for the (self-)concept and design of the agricultural innovation system, for incentives and shaping of interdisciplinary collaboration as well as for the (self-)role model of the involved actors.
Terms of use:
Documents in EconStor may