New knowledge networks of small-scale farmers in Europe’s periphery

Funding for this research was provided by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 311994, and the Scottish Government’s Strategic Research Programme (2011–2016).In this paper we assess the types of knowledge networks utilised by small-scale farmers in four case studies (located in Bulgaria, Poland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom). We focus on knowledge acquired to inform three new activities being undertaken by study participants: agricultural production, subsidy access and regulatory compliance, and farm diversification (specifically agritourism). Findings demonstrate that the new knowledge networks are dominated by different forms of expertise: formal ‘agricultural advisors’ identified in the case studies primarily offer codified managerial knowledge through centralised networks, suggesting that state-funded services for small-scale farmers are largely embedded in traditional, linear models of knowledge transfer. Production and diversification knowledge is exchanged through ‘distributed’ and ‘decentralised’ networks, where a range of actors are involved across varying geographical distances. Findings highlight issues associated with the quality and independence of both ‘free’ and paid advice, as well as the importance of combining tacit and codified knowledge for credibility. In all four cases, we found that small-scale farmers utilise formal advisory services primarily for accessing subsidies (e.g. completing application forms), rather than acquiring production knowledge. The authors argue that by utilising the state funding allocated to advisory services for small-scale farmers primarily to enable these farmers to access subsidies, important opportunities for innovation by both advisors or farmers can be lost.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Additive bio-manufacturing: 3D printing for medical recovery and human enhancement

Study, July 2018IP/G/STOA/FWC/2013-001/LOT5/C2Additive bio-manufacturing (bio-AM) is defined here as the use of 3D printing for medical purposes or non-therapeutic “human enhancement”, whether they involve the production of biological material or not. It includes any application for rehabilitating, supporting or augmenting biological functionality. The impacts of bio-AM are uncertain, and it is not clear which actions may be required to foster responsible development of the technology.This study responds to these gaps in our knowledge by describing the state of the art and future development prospects, analysing their wide-ranging impacts - including social, ethical and economic aspects - and identifying key policy challenges along with options to respond to them. Key challenges are to avoid an incoherent, piecemeal adaptation of regulatory frameworks, to support responsible development that improves citizens’ lives, and to foster public participation and citizen-driven innovation. The European RRI approach could provide a useful platform for responding to these challenges, emphasising inclusiveness and co-creation by a wide variety of stakeholder groups, including public participation.Authors: Arianna Ferrari, Martina Baumann, Christopher Coenen, Daniel Frank, Leonhard Hennen, António Moniz (KIT/ITAS); Helge Torgersen, Jan Torgersen (ITA/OEAW); Lisa van Bodegom, Freija van Duijne, Ingrid Geesink, Barend van der Meulen (Rathenau Institute); Emilio Mordini (RT); Karen Riisgaard, Rasmus Øjvind Nielsen (DBT Foundation).Published by STOA ([email protected]); Manuscript completed in July 2018Brussels, (c) European Union, 2018</i