An innovation systems perspective on strengthening agricultural education and training in sub-Saharan Africa

By D. Spielman, J. Ekboir, K. Davis, Cosmas Milton Obote Ochieng. 2008

182 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This paper examines the role of postsecondary agricultural education and training (AET) in sub-Saharan Africa in the context of the region's agricultural innovation systems. Specifically, the paper looks at how AET in sub-Saharan Africa can contribute to agricultural development by strengthening innovative capacity, or the ability of individuals and organisations to introduce new products and processes that are socially or economically relevant, particularly with respect to smallholder farmers who represent the largest group of agricultural producers in the region. The paper argues that while AET is conventionally viewed in terms of its role in building human and scientific capital, its also has a vital role to play in building the capacity of organisations and individuals to transmit and adapt new applications of existing information, new products and processes, and new organisational cultures and behaviours. The paper emphasizes the importance of improving AET systems by strengthening the innovative capabilities of AET organisations and professionals; changing organisational cultures, behaviours, and incentives; and building innovation networks and linkages. Specific recommendations in support of this include aligning the mandates of AET organisations with national development aspirations by promoting new educational programs that are more strategically attuned to the different needs of society; inducing change in the cultures of AET organisations through the introduction of educational programs and linkages beyond the formal AET system; and strengthening individual and organisational capacity by improving the incentives to forge stronger linkages between AET and diverse user communities, knowledge sources, and private industry.

Subfields: Business and International Management, General Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9435d924c09316233232d8bee32ff64098ba1fb0

How researchers see this paper

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

In Business and International Management

1. L. Klerkx
2. C. Leeuwis
3. J. Hellin
4. N. Aarts
5. M. Schut
6. A. Hall
7. Sally Brooks
8. M. Loevinsohn

In General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

1. L. Klerkx
2. C. Leeuwis
3. M. Schut
4. L. Bastiaans
5. N. Aarts
6. J. Rodenburg
7. A. Ast
8. J. Hellin

In Management of Technology and Innovation

1. L. Klerkx
2. C. Leeuwis
3. M. Schut
4. A. Hall
5. Sally Brooks
6. M. Loevinsohn

Citations in the corpus

• Agricultural Extension, Collective Action and Innovation Systems: Lessons on Network Brokering from Peru and Mexico (2012, background): “In the linear vision, innovation results from the creation of knowledge through basic scientific research, followed by strategic, applied and adaptive research, and ultimately to technology development, dissemination and adoption (Spielman et al., 2008).”
• Systems approaches to innovation in crop protection. A systematic literature review (2014, background): “…policymakers and farmers still fulfil central positions, there is increasing attention for the position of private sector representatives and consumers in the AIS publications (e.g. Chave et al., 2012; Gijsbers and van Tulder, 2011; Klerkx et al., 2010; Qaim, 2009; Spielman et al., 2008).”
• Conservation Agriculture in Maize- and Wheat-Based Systems in the (Sub)tropics: Lessons from Adaptation Initiatives in South Asia, Mexico, and Southern Africa (2012, background): “Critically, this depends on learning processes, feedback loops, and iterative interactions that are decidedly nonlinear ( Spielman et al. 2008 ).”
• Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment (2010, background): “…(AIS) thinking has become an increasingly applied framework to analyze technological, economical and institutional change in agriculture (e.g. Hall et al., 2003; Morriss et al., 2006; Spielman et al., 2008; Devaux et al., 2009; see also Spielman et al. (2009), for an overview of its applications).”
• Information networks that generate economic value: a study on clusters of adopters of new or improved technologies and practices among oil palm growers in Mexico. (2015, background): “Hence multiple sources of information play a role in informing adoption decisions (Isaac, 2012; Spielman et al., 2008), including sets of complementary extensionists with different types of expertise in pluralistic extension systems (Kilelu et al., 2014; Proctor et al., 2012; Rivera and Sulaiman,…”
• Strengthening Agricultural Innovation Capacity: Are Innovation Brokers the Answer? (2009, background): “These sorts of insights have been elaborated through the idea of fostering effective agricultural innovation systems (Hall et al., 2001; Biggs, 2007; Spielman et al. 2008; Lenné, 2008).”
• Sustainable intensification of agricultural systems in the Central African Highlands: The need for institutional innovation (2016, unknown): “The AIS approach provides a framework for the integrated analysis of dimensions, levels and stakeholder perceptions related to a specific agricultural problem, and the functioning of the more generic innovation system in which the problem is embedded (Klerkx et al., 2010; Spielman et al., 2008).”