Towards a complexity-aware theory of change for participatory research programs working within agricultural innovation systems

Douthwaite, Boru; Hoffecker, Elizabeth

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2017.04.002

Cited by 120 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The perverse incentive to seek to "dumb down" and simplify what are often irreducibly complex problems is pervasive. Venturing out to employ reflective and complexity-aware ToCs with flexibility to learn and adapt interventions still meet resistance because they take time, and do not provide the mistakenly-perceived certainty provided by simplified results-based planning approaches (Douthwaite and Hoffecker, 2017). Incentive and reward structures based on visible and immediate outputs and outcomes will discourage, even disadvantage, those employing complexity-aware ways of designing and implementing ToC for complex problems.…”

Section: Necessary Skills Plus Personal and Organizational Commitmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Resultsbased approaches that instil unrealistic certainty of outcomes encourage aid recipients to neglect hard and complex problems that may not show immediate and visible outcomes (Reeler, 2007). Even in organisations with extensive experience of AR4D, attempts to apply reflective ToC to complex problems with long time horizons have been met with misunderstanding and apprehension (Douthwaite and Hoffecker, 2017). In chaotic emergency situations decisive and rapid top down responses may be imperative in the short term to stabilise an unmanageable situation.…”

Section: Recommendations and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards appropriate mainstreaming of “Theory of Change” approaches into agricultural research for development: Challenges and opportunities

Maru

Sparrow

Butler

et al. 2018

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food insecurity persists in many parts of Africa and Asia, despite ongoing agricultural research for development (AR4D) interventions. This is resulting in a growing demand for alternative approaches to designing and evaluating interventions in complex systems. Theory of Change (ToC) is an approach which may be useful because it enables stakeholders to present and test their theories and assumptions about why and how impact may occur, ideally within an environment conducive to iterative reflection and learning. However, ToC is yet to be appropriately mainstreamed into development by donors, researchers and practitioners. We carried out a literature review, triangulated by interviews with 26 experts in African and Asian food security, consisting of researchers, advisors to programs, and donors. Although 17 (65%) of the experts had adopted ToC, their responses and the literature revealed four challenges to mainstreaming: (i) different interpretations of ToC; (ii) incoherence in relationships among the constituent concepts of ToC; (iii) confused relationships between ToC and project "logframes"; and (iv) limitations in necessary skills and commitment for enacting ToC. A case study of the evolution of a ToC in a West African AR4D project over 4 years which exemplified these challenges is presented. Five recommendations arise to assist the mainstreaming of ToC: (i) select a type of ToC suited to the relative complexity of the problem and focal system of interest; (ii) state a theory or hypotheses to be tested as the intervention progresses; (iii) articulate the relationship between the ToC and parallel approaches (e.g. logframe); (iv) accept that a ToC is a process, and (v) allow time and resources for implementers and researchers to develop ToC thinking within projects. Finally, we suggest that communities of practice should be established among AR4D and donor organisations to test, evaluate and improve the contribution that ToCs can make to sustainable food security and agricultural development.

show abstract

Section: Necessary Skills Plus Personal and Organizational Commitmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recommendations and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards appropriate mainstreaming of “Theory of Change” approaches into agricultural research for development: Challenges and opportunities

Maru

Sparrow

Butler

et al. 2018

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The existing literature about AISs has made considerable progress [32,33], but has failed to empirically investigate the synergy of national AISs based on the self-organization theory and methodology.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synergy of National Agricultural Innovation Systems

Wang

Sun

et al. 2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synergy among the various components of national agricultural innovation systems (AISs) promotes agricultural development. This paper investigated the innovation synergy among the various innovation elements of national AISs. First, we developed a synergy analysis model consisting of three innovation variables (innovation allocation, innovation output, and innovation potentiality) and one control variable (government policy supports). Secondly, a broad set of innovation indicators was selected to describe the innovation variables and the control variable, and the solutions of the order parameter equation were then calculated to investigate the self-organized synergistic patterns of a panel of the Group of Twenty (G20) countries. The empirical results indicated the following. (1) All of the G20 countries' national AISs had the potential to evolve into more advanced self-organized synergistic states under current government policy support. Furthermore, all of the developing countries were in the active period of synergy, showing stronger synergistic rising powers. However, most of the developed countries were in the stable or general period of synergy, in which synergistic rising powers were relatively weaker; (2) Stronger government policy supports played a positive role in promoting the interaction and collaboration among innovation elements and promoted the national AIS to evolve into a more advanced self-organized synergistic state. This study has important implications for understanding the complex innovation synergy of national AISs, as well as for the design and implementation of agricultural innovation strategies for policy-makers.Sustainability 2018, 10, 3385 2 of 20 in agricultural production through collaborative interaction with each other, so as to reach the coordination of economic, social, and ecological benefits in one country [6].As agricultural innovation becomes increasingly viewed as a far more complex and less linear process, it has become more and more difficult to identify the complex relations that constitute innovation processes. Recently, the agricultural innovation system (AIS) approach [5,7] has become increasingly popular as a tool for analyzing agricultural innovation processes [8][9][10]. The AIS approach evolved from a transition from the simplistic linear or pipeline model to a complex non-linear or network model of agricultural innovation [11,12]. The AIS approach provides a conceptual framework for the integrated analysis of (1) complex agricultural problems [13]; (2) innovation capacity in the agricultural system to solve these problems [14]; and (3) the structure and function of the AIS, which can enhance or constrain innovation capacities in the agricultural system [8,9,11]. Applying the AIS [5,7] framework is particularly promising for sustainable agricultural development, because it can help identify where the most binding constraints on agricultural innovation are located and how better to target interventions to remove such constraints [15].Innovation performance depends no...

show abstract

“…The agroecology model instead features a process of co-innovation, which combines both scientific and traditional knowledge that complement and reinforce each other. Farmers need to be placed at the very center of such a process of co-innovation, through bottom-up and territorial processes, helping to deliver contextualized innovative solutions to local problems [59]. To that end, it is important to foster knowledge exchange and share practices, and to create opportunities for collaboration and innovation.…”

Section: Agroecology As An Alternative Innovation Trajectory For Fostmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation Trajectories and Sustainability in the Food System

Sodano

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of the study is to answer the question of whether the current processes of technological change and innovation within the agri-food system could help to increase its sustainability. Four strands of literature are used to unveil the nexus between sustainability and innovation: models of technical change and innovation, sustainability definitions, agroecology as a science and political movement, and the conceptualization of food regimes. The results indicate that innovation processes in the system follow two innovation trajectories, leading to two different food regimes, with opposite effects on sustainability. Since market forces push towards the less sustainable regime, adequate interventions are required in order to assure the sustainability of the system.

show abstract

Towards a complexity-aware theory of change for participatory research programs working within agricultural innovation systems

Cited by 120 publications

References 33 publications

Towards appropriate mainstreaming of “Theory of Change” approaches into agricultural research for development: Challenges and opportunities

Towards appropriate mainstreaming of “Theory of Change” approaches into agricultural research for development: Challenges and opportunities

Synergy of National Agricultural Innovation Systems

Innovation Trajectories and Sustainability in the Food System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About