creating an enabling environment for fruit fly area-wide management

biosecurity built on science

Creating an enabling environment for fruit fly area-wide management

Heleen Kruger

PhD Candidate

Plant Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre


The problem

Fruit fly affects profitability Production losses

Hinders market access

Pre- and post-harvest treatments

Recent added challenges: Loss of state government support

Key chemicals restricted

Approached as technocratic issue


Fruit Fly Area-Wide Management (FF AWM)

Synchronised pest control activities across a wide

geographical area, incl. towns

Reduces pesticide need

Complex and expensive

Industry increasingly need to lead FF AWM

Requires self-organisation and collective action


Departure point

‘Local industries need help to help themselves’– AWM more than implementation of technologies

Local industries need to be able to readily meet their needs

Agricultural innovation systems (AIS) thinking– Innovation requires co-evolving technological, social, organisational, and institutional

change


Evolution of agriculture innovation (Klerkx et al. 2012)

Transfer of technology

• 1950s – 1980s

• Transfer, adoption and adoption of technologies

• Top-down

• Grower is adopter

• Researcher is expert

Farming systems

• 1980s – 1990s

• Contextualise research and technology

• Top-down

• Grower is adopter and info source

• Researcher is expert

Agricultural knowledge and

information systems

• 1990s-2000s

• Build local capacity & empower farmers

• Bottom-up

• Grower is experimenter and expert

• Researcher is capacity builder and facilitator of learning

Agricultural innovation systems

• 2000s onwards

• Includes political and institutional dimensions

• Multi-directional

• Grower is partner, entrepreneur

• Researchers are actors that enhance innovation capacity

• Both innovation partners


Theoretical approach – Functional analysis

Functions

F1. Entrepreneurial activities

F2. Knowledge development

F3. Knowledge diffusion

F4. Guidance of search

F5. Market formation

F6. Mobilisation of resources

F7. Creation of legitimacy

From Hekkert et al. (2007)


Methods

Interviews

Grower survey

Allocated findings against

functions

Identified systemic problems

Clustered into

blocking mechanisms

Identified policy inter-

ventions


Blocking mechanisms

Lack of local capacity

Difficult task

– Achieving a local shared vision is challenging

– Reliance on voluntary approaches

– Systems approaches require extensive procedures

Local barriers

– Various barriers hinder local government involvement

– Many growers are risk averse


Blocking mechanisms














Blocking mechanisms

Weak link between local industries and

broader system

Knowledge diffusion to growers is weak

– Generic information insufficient

– Inadequate extension

– Crop consultant employment varies

– Trade information is not readily accessible

Lack of multi-directional information flow

– Lack of short feedback loops

– Growers may underappreciate higher level efforts

– Possible overoptimism at higher levels

– “Grower voice” weak in higher level forums

– Limited learning between AWM programs

– No one understands the entire system, different “languages”


Blocking mechanisms


broader system



broader system










Policy intervention recommendations

Offer local trainingDifferent modulesTo support local initiatives and local participation in broader AISBut not in isolation

Invest in local knowledge-brokers

Boundary functions:

– Demand articulation

– Knowledge translation

– Network building


Policy intervention recommendations

Multi-level innovation platforms

Collaborations involving different knowledge systems

Existing innovation platforms:

- Local management groups

- Higher level groups

Need to introduce linkages throughout system to ensure co-evolution

Next research step:

How to strengthen linkages throughout QFly management innovation system, especially including the local level?


Expected outputs and outcomes

Contribute to real on-ground progress with QFly management

Potential end-users

All fruit fly innovation system stakeholders

National Fruit Fly Council

DAWR, state government departments and peak industry bodies

Outputs

Five journal article

Presentations to interested parties


Questions and acknowledgements

AcknowledgementsProf. Darren Halpin, Australian National UniversityProf. Rolf Gerritsen, Charles Darwin UniversityDr. Susie Collins, DAWRDr. Michael Cole, previously Australian Department of Agriculture

Any questions?

Heleen [email protected]

creating an enabling environment for fruit fly area-wide management

Science