The novelty of simple and known technologies and the rhythm of farmer-centred innovation in family dairy farming in Brazil

Information networks that generate economic value: A study on clusters of adopters of new or improved technologies and practices among oil palm growers in Mexico

“…Part of the failure to do so might lie in that several AIM, despite providing different types of complementary advice, still have a rather linear 'technology push' orientation despite that a more responsive and demand-driven approach to stimulating technology adoption is required as recent literature indicates (Kilelu et al, 2014;Novo et al, 2014). Also, it appears that while the AIM provides complimentary services, it could more actively overcome homophily and act as a central catalyst of multi-actor networks, in line with work that underscores the need to foster such heterogeneous networks in innovation systems (Compagnone and Hellec, 2015;Gielen et al, 2003;Klerkx et al, 2009;Spielman et al, 2011;Thuo et al, 2014).…”

“…Furthermore, while sometimes a technology or practice as generated by research or agribusiness is considered as a 'finished' innovation so a readymade technology or practice which can be used as a 'turn-key' solution, it is only finished when it is integrated by farmers in their farming system and provides value (Leeuwis and Van den Ban, 2004). This may still require further adaptation to improve fit with the farming system or adjustment of the institutional context in which it will be embedded, or complemented with farmer-generated innovations (Douthwaite et al, 2001;Garb and Friedlander, 2014;Millar and Connell, 2009;Novo et al, 2014). An essential element in the adoption of technologies and practices that are not incremental and easy to fit within existing farming systems is that it requires working on a reconfiguration of institutional frameworks (such as rules, regulations, habits, values) (Hounkonnou et al, 2012;Muñoz et al, 2007b), and requires changes beyond the farming system level, for example in the context of the value chain.…”

Innovación y productores: un análisis bibliométrico

“…Dentro de las publicaciones para América Latina, Brasil tiene contribuciones en el área de bioenergía (Zapata et al, 2014), sustentabilidad (das Chagas Oliveira et al, 2012, crédito (Fernandes et al, 1978) y lácteos (Novo et al, 2015), por mencionar algunos. En el caso de México se ubican contribuciones en temas como: maíz (Zarazúa et al, 2012;Camacho-Villa et al, 2016;Roldán-Suárez et al, 2018), lácteos (Cortez-Arriola et al, 2015), ganadería (Cuevas et al, 2013;Gómez et al, 2013), agricultura de conservación (Díaz-José et al, 2016), instituciones (Dutrénit et al, 2012), trigo (Reynolds y Borlaug, 2006) y camarón (Lebel et al, 2016).…”

Innovating social connectedness for agricultural innovations in eastern Ethiopia

“…In Ethiopia, farmers have old dating experience and time-tested knowledge of agricultural practices, and mutual support practices that are applied to respond to adverse livelihood shocks and risks (Endris et al, 2017;Maru et al, 2019). However, while smallholder farmers are among the key sources of agricultural innovations, many studies conceived them as adopters of externally developed technologies and practices (Kiptot et al, 2007;Kolade et al, 2014;Letty et al, 2011;Novo et al, 2014;Reij & Waters-Bayer, 2014;Röling, 2009). Agricultural innovation emerges from local practices (Hooli & Jauhiainen, 2018).…”