Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: insights from the Dutch agricultural sector

By L. Klerkx. 2009

688 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8f2624dd997ad8efb118619532d7f7e8a43b7820

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

1. C. Leeuwis
2. N. Aarts
3. L. Klerkx
4. A. Hall
5. C. Kilelu
6. Paula Kivimaa
7. F. Hermans
8. Catherine E. A. Mulligan

In Strategy and Management

1. F. Polzin
2. C. Leeuwis
3. L. Klerkx
4. Marko P. Hekkert
5. Benjamin Sovacool
6. A. Hall
7. Simona Negro
8. N. Aarts

Citations in the corpus

• Strengthening Agricultural Innovation Capacity: Are Innovation Brokers the Answer? (2009, methodology): “An example is the Dairy Farming Academy (DFA), whose goal is to set up new farmer networks on the basis of shared interests (see Klerkx & Leeuwis, 2009b).”
• Beyond knowledge brokering: an exploratory study on innovation intermediaries in an evolving smallholder agricultural system in Kenya (2011, background): “2003 , Klerkx and Leeuwis 2008 , Klerkx and Leeuwis 2009 ).”
• Advances in Knowledge Brokering in the Agricultural Sector: Towards Innovation System Facilitation (2012, background): “Terms such as ‘innovation intermediary’ or ‘innovation broker’ have been coined to indicate this role (Klerkx and Leeuwis 2009; Kilelu et al. 2011).”
• The distribution of roles and functions for upscaling and outscaling innovations in agricultural innovation systems (2013, background): “Klerkx and Leeuwis (2009) make a further distinction between brokers functioning at the inter-organisational level and systemic brokers.”
• Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment (2010, methodology): “Such actors, who function as independent 'innovation brokers', have a relatively neutral position (see Morriss et al., 2006; Klerkx and Leeuwis, 2009; Klerkx et al., 2009; Regeer et al., 2010).”
• Unravelling the role of innovation platforms in supporting co-evolution of innovation: Contributions and tensions in a smallholder dairy development programme (2013, background): “…have argued that there is thus an important role for so-called innovation intermediar ies, who engage in coordinatin g and brokering relations at several interfaces in complex multi-actor configurations in the AIS (Devaux et al., 2009; Klerkx and Leeuwis, 2008, 2009; Morriss et al., 2006 ).”
• Multi-stakeholder platforms for linking small farmers to value chains: evidence from the Andes (2011, background): “The immediate benefits of innovation brokers are often intangible and the time frame for change to work its way through the innovation system may be quite long (Klerkx et al., 2009).”
• Addressing barriers to eco-innovation: Exploring the finance mobilisation functions of institutional innovation intermediaries (2016, background): “…2009; van Lente et al., 2003; Yusuf, 2008), resulting in conceptual and qualitative evidence that innovation intermediaries at the intersection of public and private R&D and commercialisation have beneficial effects (Kivimaa, 2014; Klerkx and Leeuwis, 2009; Yusuf, 2008; van Lente et al., 2003).”
• Competitiveness of Small Farms and Innovative Food Supply Chains: The Role of Food Hubs in Creating Sustainable Regional and Local Food Systems (2016, background): “Such intermediary activities include: helping to provide information about potential collaborators; brokering a transaction between two or more parties; acting as a mediator, or go-between, bodies or organizations that are already collaborating; and helping find advice, funding and support for the i”
• How mismatching institutional logics hinder niche–regime interaction and how boundary spanners intervene (2015, background): “This role of consultants was also observed by Klerkx et al. (2010).”
• Functions and limitations of farmer cooperatives as innovation intermediaries: Findings from China (2014, background): “As innovation is a dynamic and situated phenomenon, case studies are an deemed apt approach (Klerkx et al., 2010), as they are suitable to explore and explain the ‘what questions’ and ‘how questions’ this study addresses (Yin, 2009). Three cases were purposefully selected to represent different type”
• Guides or gatekeepers? Incumbent-oriented transition intermediaries in a low-carbon era (2020, background): “For example, Klerkx and Leeuwis [10] argue that intermediaries fulfil a vital role in innovation ecosystems by overcoming informational, cognitive, and managerial gaps.”