Why we should rethink ‘adoption’ in agricultural innovation: Empirical insights from Malawi

The challenges of land degradation, climate change and food insecurity have led to the introduction of conservation agriculture (CA) aimed at enhancing yield and soil quality. Despite positive biophysical results, low adoption rates have been the focus of studies identifying constraints to wider uptake. While the adoption framework is popular for measuring agricultural innovation, objective adoption measurements remain problematic and do not recognize the contextual and dynamic decision‐making process. This study uses a technographic and participatory approach to move beyond the adoption framework and understand: (a) how agricultural decision‐making takes place including the knowledge construction, (b) how agriculture is performed in a context of project intervention and (c) how practice adaptation plays out in the context of interacting knowledge. Findings confirm that farmer decision‐making is dynamic, multidimensional and contextual. The common innovation diffusion model uses a theory of change, showcasing benefits through training lead farmers as community advocates and demonstration trials. Our study shows that the assumed model of technology transfer with reference to climate‐smart agriculture interventions is not as linear and effective as assumed previously. We introduce four lenses that contribute to better understanding complex innovation dynamics: (a) social dynamics and information transfer, (b) contextual costs and benefits, (c) experience and risk aversion, and (d) practice adaptation. Investments should build on existing knowledge and farming systems including a focus on the dynamic decision process to support the 'scaling up, scaling out and scaling deep' agenda for sustainable agricultural innovations

‘Triple wins’ or ‘triple faults’? Analysing the equity implications of policy discourses on climate-smart agriculture (CSA)

This paper analyses contrasting discourses of ‘climate-smart agriculture’ (CSA) for their implications on control over and access to changing resources in agriculture. One of the principal areas of contestation around CSA relates to equity, including who wins and who loses, who is able to participate, and whose knowledge and perspectives count in the process. Yet to date, the equity implications of CSA remain an under-researched area. We apply an equity framework centred on procedure, distribution and recognition, to four different discourses. Depending on which discourses are mobilised, the analysis helps to illuminate: (1) how CSA may transfer the burden of responsibility for climate change mitigation to marginalised producers and resource managers (distributive equity); (2) how CSA discourses generally fail to confront entrenched power relations that may constrain or block the emergence of more ‘pro-poor’ forms of agricultural development, adaptation to climate change, or carbon sequestration and storage (procedural equity); (3) how CSA discourses can have tangible implications for the bargaining power of the poorest and most vulnerable groups (recognition). The paper contributes to work showing the need for deeper acknowledgement of the political nature of the transformations necessary to address the challenges caused by a changing climate for the agricultural sector

Basket of options: unpacking the concept

How to stimulate technological change to enhance agricultural productivity and reduce poverty remains an area of vigorous debate. In the face of heterogeneity among farm households and rural areas, one proposition is to offer potential users a ‘basket of options’ – a range of agricultural technologies from which potential users may select the ones that are best suited to their specific circumstances. While the idea of a basket of options is now generally accepted, it has attracted little critical attention. In this paper, we reflect on outstanding questions: the appropriate dimensions of a basket, its contents and how they are identified, and how a basket might be presented. We conceive a basket of options in terms of its depth (number of options related to a problem or opportunity) and breadth (the number of different problems or opportunities addressed). The dimensions of a basket should reflect the framing of the problem or opportunity at hand and the objective in offering the basket. We recognise that increasing the number of options leads to a trade-off by decreasing the fraction of those options that are relevant to an individual user. Farmers might try out, adapt or use one or more of the options in a basket, possibly leading to a process of technological change. We emphasise that the selection (or not) of specific options from the basket, and potential adaptation of the options, provide important opportunities for learning. Baskets of options can therefore be understood as important boundary concepts that invite critical engagement, comparison and discussion. Significant knowledge gaps remain, however, about the best ways to present the basket and to guide potential users to select the options that are most relevant to them

Climate change adaptation in European river basins

This paper contains an assessment and standardized comparative analysis of the current water management regimes in four case-studies in three European river basins: the Hungarian part of the Upper Tisza, the Ukrainian part of the Upper Tisza (also called Zacarpathian Tisza), Alentejo Region (including the Alqueva Reservoir) in the Lower Guadiana in Portugal, and Rivierenland in the Netherlands. The analysis comprises several regime elements considered to be important in adaptive and integrated water management: agency, awareness raising and education, type of governance and cooperation structures, information management and—exchange, policy development and—implementation, risk management, and finances and cost recovery. This comparative analysis has an explorative character intended to identify general patterns in adaptive and integrated water management and to determine its role in coping with the impacts of climate change on floods and droughts. The results show that there is a strong interdependence of the elements within a water management regime, and as such this interdependence is a stabilizing factor in current management regimes. For example, this research provides evidence that a lack of joint/participative knowledge is an important obstacle for cooperation, or vice versa. We argue that there is a two-way relationship between information management and collaboration. Moreover, this research suggests that bottom-up governance is not a straightforward solution to water management problems in large-scale, complex, multiple-use systems, such as river basins. Instead, all the regimes being analyzed are in a process of finding a balance between bottom-up and top–down governance. Finally, this research shows that in a basin where one type of extreme is dominant—like droughts in the Alentejo (Portugal) and floods in Rivierenland (Netherlands)—the potential impacts of other extremes are somehow ignored or not perceived with the urgency they might deserv

Citizen science breathes new life into participatory agricultural research : A review

Participatory research can improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and scope of research processes, and foster social inclusion, empowerment and sustainability. Yet despite four decades of agricultural research institutions exploring and developing methods for participatory research, it has never become mainstream in the agricultural technology development cycle. Citizen science promises an innovative approach to participation in research, using the unique facilities of new digital technologies, but its potential in agricultural research participation has not been systematically probed. To this end, we conducted a critical literature review. We found that citizen science opens up four opportunities for creatively reshaping research: i) new possibilities for interdisciplinary collaboration, ii) rethinking configurations of socio-computational systems, iii) research on democratization of science more broadly, and iv) new accountabilities. Citizen science also brings a fresh perspective on the barriers to institutionalizing participation in the agricultural sciences. Specifically, we show how citizen science can reconfigure cost-motivation-accountability combinations using digital tools, open up a larger conceptual space of experimentation, and stimulate new collaborations. With appropriate and persistent institutional support and investment, citizen science can therefore have a lasting impact on how agricultural science engages with farming communities and wider society, and more fully realize the promises of participation

Ghana's evolving protein economy

This paper provides an initial analysis of Ghana's protein economy in the light on current debates about nutritional transition and livestock revolution. Ghana's strong economic growth and reducing levels of poverty make it a particularly interesting case. Protein-rich foods, including fish and livestock products, supply 20-40 percent of protein consumed. Overall fish is becoming less important and poultry more important; but there also are large difference in household expenditure on protein-rich foods across wealth categories, regions and areas. Specifically, the protein element of the nutritional transition and the consumption side of the livestock revolution would appear to be unfolding at different speeds and in different ways, along an axis that is urban-south-non-poor at one end, and rural-north-poor at the other. We explore the policy and political economy dimensions of these change

Boosting scientific publications in Africa: which IPRs protection channels matter?

This paper examines how Africa’s share in the contribution to global scientific knowledge can be boosted with existing Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) mechanisms. The findings which broadly indicate that tight IPRs are correlated with knowledge contribution can be summarized in two main points. First, the enshrinement of IPRs laws in a country’s Constitution is a good condition for knowledge economy. Secondly, while Main IP laws, WIPO treaties and Bilateral treaties are positively correlated with scientific publications, the IPRs law channel have a negative correlation. Whereas the study remains expositional, it does however offer interesting insights into the need for IPRs in the promotion of knowledge contribution within sampled countries of the continent. Other policy implications are discussed