Some Reflections on Agricultural Innovation Systems Methodological
Framework
Kebebe Ergano, Alan Duncan and Alemayehu BelayNBDC Workshop on Baselining Changes in Planning, Implementation and Collective Action
Addis Ababa, Nov 8-11, 2010
Agricultural innovation Systems Approach Highlights
• Innovation is not about creating new technologies, but about putting ideas into use.
• Application of new/existing knowledge leads to innovation
• Innovation is no longer a new idea that comes from outside
• Research and development is no longer the exclusive domain of scientists
• A wider range of actors must be involved to find sustainable solutions to development problems
• Innovations takes place in a networks of links and alliances between different actors
• Institutional contexts condition the behaviour patterns of actors
• It is not enough to have strong actors: institutions, relationships and interactions matter!
• Innovation Systems Framework offers an inclusive analytical model to reveal the existence and nature of innovation process of significance
Agricultural innovation Systems Approach…
Implementing IS diagnostic studies
• Diagnostic study employs different methods in data collection and analysis
•Surveys •Key informant interviews•Focused group discussions, etc
Unit of analysis
• The national systems of innovation (NSI) focuses on the nation-state as the unit of political organization– The importance of policies– The role of governments in policy formulation
and implementation
• Other levels are possible and more relevant to the current exercise– Regional innovation systems (Cooke et al, 1997)– Sectoral innovation systems (Malerba, 2002)
Unit of analysis…
• Landscape level of analysis– Goal of R & D has become more complex
and emphasis on sustainable management of natural resources has increased
ASTI methodological framework
• A six step approach1. Historical background of the sector/issue2. Reviewing the policy environment3. Mapping the key actors4. Assessing competencies, habits and
practices5. Analyzing the performance of the key
functions6. Assessing/mapping the linkages7. Conclusions/recommendations
1. Reviewing the historical background of the sector
• Trends/shifts/evolution in NRM in a timeline– Have things remained largely the
same/increased/decreased?– What factors explain the observed trends?
•Policy?•Investments?•Climatic factors?•Other?
Reviewing the historical background…
•Methods to use– Mostly literature search; document reviews– Involves mainly desk research– Sources of information may include:
•Previous sector studies, including unpublished/grey literature
•Official govt statistics•Websites and databases etc•GIS maps (land use-land cover)
2. Reviewing the policy environment
• Policy: a “purposive course of action followed by an actor or set of actors”
• Key questions to consider:– What constitutes policy? (based on Young and
Quinn, 2002)
•Official state documents •Authoritative government action •Patterns of spending• Implementation processes •Activities on the ground•A reaction to real world needs/problems•A decision to do something or nothing
Reviewing the policy environment…
•Key questions to consider:– What am I looking for?
•Broadly, provisions that support or undermine/hinder innovation
•Such provisions could have any of the following effects:
– Create new actors/organizations– Set new institutions (rules, laws etc)– Change how actors interact– Expand/limit knowledge sharing/flows– Shift power balances/dynamics– Affect funding/investments/access to resources
Reviewing the policy environment…
•In terms of analysis:– Is there a link between the evolution of the
policy environment and changes in the landscape?
– Has there been a change in the “innovation enabling factors”?•Towards more/better participation? •Towards more interactions•Towards increased knowledge sharing•Towards increased investments in NRM?•Towards increased application of S&T?
3. Mapping of the key actors• Which actors do you include and why?
– Arnold and Bell (2001) and its modifications (CTA; IFPRI; World bank etc but,•Based on actors’ main activity/primary role•Categorization of actors•What have we learnt/experienced?
– Literature review/policy review will reveal some relevant actors
– Key informant interviews with sector practitioners are also helpful
– A pre-study consultative stakeholders meeting
Different actor categories (Arnold and Bell, 2001)
Market / Demand sector (standards, volume, price, quality)
Enterprise sector Produces and sells products ( mainly users of knowledge)
Diffusion sector
Intermediary organizations / knowledge transmitters
Research sector
Generates knowledge
Infrastructure (policy, legislation, resources)
4. Assessing the performance of key functions
• Identify the functions of the innovation systems that is the object/focus of your analysis
• Ask/check if:•Are the identified functions being performed? By whom?
•Are all the necessary actors present/missing?•Could the present/missing actors/functions be performed by other existing actors or new actors are needed?
– The results are presented in an actor – function matrix
– Reviewing the actor roles/mandates could provide some information
– Comment on how/how well the various functions are being performed
5. Assessing competencies, habits and practices
• Habits and practices refer:– to what actors routinely do– What is considered ‘normal’– How they would ‘naturally’ behave
• They determine how actors respond to change/innovation triggers
• They are shaped by the historical, political and cultural contexts
• They may explain the trends observed in the sector• These habits and practices may form the basis of
intervention– What are the actors habits/practices influencing
learning, linkages and investments?
Assessing competencies, habits and practices…
• Competencies refer to:– Talents, skills and experiences
•Embodied in employees•Embedded in technical systems
• Do the actors have appropriate competencies?• Are there mechanisms for building the necessary
competencies?• Are new competencies being built?
6. Assessing and mapping linkages
• Interactions are key to learning and innovation• It’s important to assess the presence of
linkages as well as their quality/strength• This is done through a survey, using structured
questionnaires • The findings of the survey reveal the “gaps”
between the actor roles/mandates/responsibilities and the actual occurrence on the ground
• They provide a “real” account of the status of the innovation system
• BUT data/statistics alone don’t tell much…
Assessing and mapping linkages…
• In the analysis, link the results of the survey to the other components of the methodological framework e.g.– How does the policy environment relate to/explain the
findings?– How do the existing actor competencies relate
to/explain the observed trends?– Is there a disconnect between what actors claim they
do (functions, roles, mandates) and what actually happens in the innovation system?
Assessing and mapping linkages…
– Can we explain the trends/survey results on the basis of actors’ known habits and practices?
– How have these known habits and practices been influenced by the policy and institutional framework? OR
– Have these habits and practices influenced the policy environment?
• What else can’t we explain?– These are key to advancing the framework
7. Conclusions and recommendations
• Relate findings to the key elements of the innovation system
–Actors/functions–Institutions/policies–Interactions/linkages–Learning/knowledge flows–Competencies, habits and practices
Thanks for your attention!