Understanding the dynamics of multi-stakeholder innovation systems and the opportunities for joint learning by small scale farmers

Through a European Union funded project called JOLISAA (Joint Learning in Innovation Systems in African Agriculture), the nature of smallholder  oriented innovation systems have been explored in terms of partnerships, triggers that have given rise to them and the nature of the innovations themselves. The main objective was to analyse a broad diversity of multi-stakeholder agricultural innovation processes involving smallholders. The analysis of 11 cases documented comprises innovation bundles composed of technical, organisational and institutional innovations. The eleven cases documented showed that six exhibited non-technical innovation processes frequently related to market access as well as to inputs and services. Triggers that drive smallholders and other stakeholders to initiate  innovation processes include environment stress, introduction of new  technologies, identification of market change as well as policy or regulatory changes. The cases that have been documented show a variation of  stakeholders responsible for initiating the process. In some cases it was smallholders approaching other stakeholders for assistance with addressing a challenge, while in other cases it was researchers or extensionists who undertook to develop an innovation to address a challenge that they had encountered through their interaction with smallholders. All documented cases have involved the contribution of ideas, knowledge and skills by at least three different types of stakeholders and the role of local knowledge has been acknowledge through the study. Out of the eleven cases three cases have been selected for a collaborative case assessment which strives to assess further key issues such as actual roles and contributions of various role-players, the dynamics of the innovation process and outcome. Several opportunities arise for joint learning with small scale farmers

Understanding the dynamics of multi-stakeholder innovation systems and the opportunities for joint learning by small scale farmers

Through a European Union funded project called JOLISAA (Joint Learning in Innovation Systems in African Agriculture), the nature of smallholder oriented innovation systems have been explored in terms of partnerships, triggers that have given rise to them and the nature of the innovations themselves. The main objective was to analyse a broad diversity of multi-stakeholder agricultural innovation processes involving smallholders. The analysis of 11 cases documented comprises innovation bundles composed of technical, organisational and institutional innovations. The eleven cases documented showed that six exhibited non-technical innovation processes frequently related to market access as well as to inputs and services. Triggers that drive smallholders and other stakeholders to initiate innovation processes include environment stress, introduction of new technologies, identification of market change as well as policy or regulatory changes. The cases that have been documented show a variation of stakeholders responsible for initiating the process. In some cases it was smallholders approaching other stakeholders for assistance with addressing a challenge, while in other cases it was researchers or extensionists who undertook to develop an innovation to address a challenge that they had encountered through their interaction with smallholders. All documented cases have involved the contribution of ideas, knowledge and skills by at least three different types of stakeholders and the role of local knowledge has been acknowledge through the study. Out of the eleven cases three cases have been selected for a collaborative case assessment which strives to assess further key issues such as actual roles and contributions of various role-players, the dynamics of the innovation process and outcome. Several opportunities arise for joint learning with small scale farmers.http://www.journals.co.za/ej/ejour_agri.htmlhb201

Acquisition of heroin conditioned immunosuppression requires IL-1 signaling in the dorsal hippocampus

Opioid users experience increased incidence of infection, which may be partially attributable to both direct opiate-immune interactions and conditioned immune responses. Previous studies have investigated the neural circuitry governing opioid conditioned immune responses, but work remains to elucidate the mechanisms mediating this effect. Our laboratory has previously shown that hippocampal IL-1 signaling, specifically, is required for the expression of heroin conditioned immunosuppression following learning. The current studies were designed to further characterize the role of hippocampal IL-1 in this phenomenon by manipulating IL-1 during learning. Experiment 1 tested whether hippocampal IL-1 is also required for the acquisition of heroin conditioned immunosuppression, while Experiment 2 tested whether hippocampal IL-1 is required for the expression of unconditioned heroin immunosuppression. We found that blocking IL-1 signaling in the dorsal hippocampus with IL-1RA during each conditioning session, but not on interspersed non-conditioning days, significantly attenuated the acquisition of heroin conditioned immunosuppression. Strikingly, we found that the same IL-1RA treatment did not alter unconditioned immunosuppression to a single dose of heroin. Thus, IL-1 signaling is not a critical component of the response to heroin but rather may play a role in the formation of the association between heroin and the context. Collectively, these studies suggest that IL-1 signaling, in addition to being involved in the expression of a heroin conditioned immune response, is also involved in the acquisition of this effect. Importantly, this effect is likely not due to blocking the response to the unconditioned stimulus since IL-1RA did not affect heroin’s immunosuppressive effects

Making sense of innovation processes in african smallholder agricullture

The European-funded Framework Programme 7 project, Joint Learning in Innovation Systems in African Agriculture (JOLISAA), assessed agricultural innovation experiences focused on smallholders in Benin, Kenya, and South Africa. Fifty-six cases were characterized through review of grey literature and interviews with resource persons, according to a common analytical framework inspired by the innovation systems (IS) perspective. Thirteen of the cases were assessed in greater depth through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions and multistakeholder workshops. The cases covered a wide diversity of experiences in terms of types, domains, scales, timelines, initiators of innovation and stakeholders involved. Findings revealed multiple triggers and drivers of innovation. For external stakeholders, key triggers included likelihood of offering a technological fix to an existing problem and availability of funding. For local people, access to input and output markets was a powerful trigger and driver. Market types and dynamics varied greatly. Developing functional value chains and accessing markets proved particularly challenging, especially for poorer and weakly organized farmers. Over long periods, determinants of innovation changed dynamically and often unpredictably, including motivations of key stakeholders, triggers, drivers and stakeholder arrangements. The direction of innovation evolved, often moving from a technology entry point to more organizational or institutional issues. A recurring challenge for fostering innovation is whether and how to build on local initiatives and knowledge, and how to sustain externally driven innovation processes beyond the project time frame. A major conclusion from JOLISAA is that innovation has to be seen as a continuously evolving process of ‘innovation bundles’ (a combination of different types of innovation) of various kinds, rather than as a pre-planned, and usually, narrowly-defined technical intervention. Consequently, open-ended, flexible approaches to innovation are needed with the potential to engage meaningfully over a long time with local stakeholders and bearers of local innovation dynamics, so that they take full charge of the innovation process and direction

A critical comparative review of evidence on alternative instruments for supporting research and innovation in agri-food systems in the Global South

Financial support is a critical enabling factor for healthy agri-food innovation systems, particularly within resource-limited settings, though additional forms of support are also necessary. This motivated a critical comparative review of evidence in peer-reviewed and gray literature on the range of instruments that support innovation in agri-food systems in the Global South, toward achieving sustainable agriculture intensification. The main aim is to provide recommendations to innovation managers on the choice of different instruments for supporting innovation. The key guiding questions for the comparative analysis were whether the instrument fosters uptake of innovation and whether it promotes inclusive development. A review of the literature was supplemented with a scan of websites for sources of peer-reviewed and gray literature documenting the application of the 12 selected instruments. The study revealed three categories of instruments: (Type A) those that support entrepreneurship; (Type B) those that primarily finance innovation; and (Type C) those that support innovation in real-life contexts. Our analysis indicates that innovation managers and funders need to select instruments that are likely to fit the specific context as well as to address the mandates of their organizations, and in so doing, they must consider how to ensure the sustainability of their investments and meet the needs of their beneficiaries. This review represents one of a handful that have compared the use of multiple instruments across multiple continents in the Global South, and can serve as an important decision-making tool for investors and funders looking to invest in agri-food innovation systems

Long-term trends in survival of a declining population: the case of the little owl (Athene noctua) in the Netherlands

The little owl (Athene noctua) has declined significantly in many parts of Europe, including the Netherlands. To understand the demographic mechanisms underlying their decline, we analysed all available Dutch little owl ringing data. The data set spanned 35 years, and included more than 24,000 ringed owls, allowing detailed estimation of survival rates through multi-state capture–recapture modelling taking dispersal into account. We investigated geographical and temporal variation in age-specific survival rates and linked annual survival estimates to population growth rate in corresponding years, as well as to environmental covariates. The best model for estimating survival assumed time effects on both juvenile and adult survival rates, with average annual survival estimated at 0.258 (SE = 0.047) and 0.753 (SE = 0.019), respectively. Juvenile survival rates decreased with time whereas adult survival rates fluctuated regularly among years, low survival occurring about every 4 years. Years when the population declined were associated with low juvenile survival. More than 60% of the variation in juvenile survival was explained by the increase in road traffic intensity or in average temperature in spring, but these correlations rather reflect a gradual decrease in juvenile survival coinciding with long-term global change than direct causal effects. Surprisingly, vole dynamics did not explain the cyclic dynamics of adult survival rate. Instead, dry and cold years led to low adult survival rates. Low juvenile survival rates, that limit recruitment of first-year breeders, and the regular occurrence of years with poor adult survival, were the most important determinants of the population decline of the little owl

Long-term trends in survival of a declining population: the case of the little owl (Athene noctua) in the Netherlands

The little owl (Athene noctua) has declined significantly in many parts of Europe, including the Netherlands. To understand the demographic mechanisms underlying their decline, we analysed all available Dutch little owl ringing data. The data set spanned 35 years, and included more than 24,000 ringed owls, allowing detailed estimation of survival rates through multi-state capture–recapture modelling taking dispersal into account. We investigated geographical and temporal variation in age-specific survival rates and linked annual survival estimates to population growth rate in corresponding years, as well as to environmental covariates. The best model for estimating survival assumed time effects on both juvenile and adult survival rates, with average annual survival estimated at 0.258 (SE = 0.047) and 0.753 (SE = 0.019), respectively. Juvenile survival rates decreased with time whereas adult survival rates fluctuated regularly among years, low survival occurring about every 4 years. Years when the population declined were associated with low juvenile survival. More than 60% of the variation in juvenile survival was explained by the increase in road traffic intensity or in average temperature in spring, but these correlations rather reflect a gradual decrease in juvenile survival coinciding with long-term global change than direct causal effects. Surprisingly, vole dynamics did not explain the cyclic dynamics of adult survival rate. Instead, dry and cold years led to low adult survival rates. Low juvenile survival rates, that limit recruitment of first-year breeders, and the regular occurrence of years with poor adult survival, were the most important determinants of the population decline of the little owl