Application of agricultural innovation systems approaches to smallholder sustainable intensification: Lessons from the Ethiopian Highlands

Abstract

<p>Since the 1960s, there has been a progressive development of approaches to agricultural innovation from the linear transfer of technology approach to a system-oriented approach. The widely used systems approach called agricultural innovation systems (AIS) reconceptualises agricultural innovation as being a result of interactions among diverse actors and beyond simple adoption of technological innovation. This approach has mainly been operationalised through a network of actors called innovation platforms (IPs), and current practices with IPs in SubSaharan Africa (SSA) have shown their limitations in stimulating institutional innovations, sustaining innovation, and including farmers in the innovation process (Chapter 1). Using IPs that link lower-level IPs with the higher-level IPs, referred to as multilevel IPs, was seen as having the potential to help in negotiating the complex technological, organisational, and institutional changes required to transform smallholder agriculture and successfully operationalise the AIS approach.</p> <p>The present research aimed to assess multilevel IPs' effectiveness in attaining and sustaining smallholder livestock technological and institutional innovation outcomes. It has three research questions that seek to identify the effectiveness of the multilevel IPs in attaining innovation, enabling sustained uses of innovation outcomes beyond the project period, and including farmers in the innovation process. This thesis addressed the empirical research questions by employing a single case study approach. The case study was the Africa RISING Ethiopian Highlands Phase 1 (2011–2016) project. Both primary and secondary data from various sources were collected from September to December 2018, two years after the multilevel IPs were phased out. The primary data were collected using semi-structured questionnaires developed separately for farmers, project coordinators, and other stakeholders involved with the multilevel IPs. A total of 48 key informant interviews and ten focus group discussions were conducted. Secondary data of project documents, IP event (meetings, field days, and training) reports, and the published and grey literature research reports produced were used to analyse the innovation process and triangulate data. Data were transcribed and coded using NVivo software. A thematic analysis approach was used to analyse the data and address the three research questions identified under the overall research aim.</p> <p>Chapters 2, 3 and 4 address the three empirical questions of the research. The findings show that both successes and challenges were observed in operationalising the AIS approach. The positive achievements of the multilevel IPs identified were the inclusivity of the diagnosis activities, the technical changes generated, and the improvements in collaboration between actors within the innovation process. The challenges faced by the multilevel IPs were identified as resulting from the limited attention given to market-oriented and institutional issues and were mainly related to weaknesses in ultimately fulfilling the demand articulation function. However, overall, the expected advantages of a multilevel IP structure were not fully realised. </p> <p>The main insight from this study is that a multilevel structure is not in itself sufficient to address issues of stimulating institutional innovation, ensuring sustained innovation, and making sure innovations meet the needs of farmers. For this, possible strategies for better fulfilling this critical function of demand articulation are provided by a framework (Chapter 5) that aims to shift the focus from farm-level technological innovations to a broader view of innovation that encompasses the organisational and institutional elements of innovation based on systems thinking. The proposed strategy involves the need to view the whole value chain for the specific farm enterprise chosen by farmers as an integrated system. Improving the efficiency of the system should be the shared goal of the diverse and multilevel stakeholders who can address the interrelated value chain issues that farmers experience in order to increase the productivity of farmers’ livestock enterprises and enable the farmers to participate in the growing market opportunities for livestock products. The limitations and opportunities of the case study approach and further research areas are also indicated. The thesis draws key lessons from the case study.</p>