Systemic perspectives on scaling agricultural innovations. A review

By S. Wigboldus, L. Klerkx, C. Leeuwis, M. Schut, S. Muilerman, H. Jochemsen. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2016

312 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Agricultural production involves the scaling of agricultural innovations such as disease-resistant and drought-tolerant maize varieties, zero-tillage techniques, permaculture cultivation practices based on perennial crops and automated milking systems. Scaling agricultural innovations should take into account complex interactions between biophysical, social, economic and institutional factors. Actual methods of scaling are rather empirical and based on the premise of ‘find out what works in one place and do more of the same, in another place’. These methods thus do not sufficiently take into account complex realities beyond the concepts of innovation transfer, dissemination, diffusion and adoption. As a consequence, scaling initiatives often do not produce the desired effect. They may produce undesirable effects in the form of negative spill-overs or unanticipated side effects such as environmental degradation, bad labour conditions of farm workers and loss of control of farming communities over access to genetic resources. Therefore, here, we conceptualise scaling processes as an integral part of a systemic approach to innovation, to anticipate on the possible consequences of scaling efforts. We propose a method that connects the heuristic framework of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions (MLP) to a philosophical ‘modal aspects’ framework, with the objective of elucidating the connectedness between technologies, processes and practices. The resultant framework, the PRactice-Oriented Multi-level perspective on Innovation and Scaling (PROMIS), can inform research and policymakers on the complex dynamics involved in scaling. This is illustrated in relation to three cases in which the framework was applied: scaling agro-ecological practices in Nicaragua, farmer field schools on cocoa cultivation in Cameroon and ‘green rubber’ cultivation in Southwest China.

Subfields: Environmental Chemistry, General Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/de0e0e8972479b07222b9dd978b45a5e64acf99f

How researchers see this paper

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

In General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

1. Ruerd Ruben
2. Fabio Bartolini
3. Gianluca Brunori
4. L. Klerkx

In Global and Planetary Change

1. Ruerd Ruben
2. A. Wieczorek
3. J. McDermott
4. Gianluca Brunori
5. L. Klerkx

Citations in the corpus

• Big Data in Smart Farming – A review (2017, background): “The same holds for ethical aspects of an innovation such as Big Data that could be addressed in future research (Carolan, 2016; Driessen and Heutinck, 2015; Wigboldus et al., 2016).”
• Dealing with the game-changing technologies of Agriculture 4.0: How do we manage diversity and responsibility in food system transition pathways? (2020, unknown): “…arrangements, and values they embody and the transformative outcomes they envision (Kanger and Schot, 2018; Schot and Kanger, 2018; Stirling, 2011), with potentially unknown and un-seen outcomes once going to scale (Hartswood and Jirotka, 2016; Scholz et al., 2018; Wigboldus et al., 2016).”
• Less meat, more legumes: prospects and challenges in the transition toward sustainable diets in Sweden (2018, unknown): “However, policies to support this transition will have to consider the complex interactions between agricultural systems, market demand and the climate impact from farming, processing and consumption (Wigboldus et al., 2016).”
• Sustainability transitions in developing countries: Major insights and their implications for research and policy (2017, background): “Actors initiating experiments use various strategies to cope with barriers, depending on the context and support available (Hermans et al., 2016; Wigboldus et al., 2016; Jolly and Raven, 2015).”
• Digital transformation of agriculture and rural areas: A socio-cyber-physical system framework to support responsibilisation (2021, background): “…continuous concern to adapt and adjust where and when necessary during further diffusion and scaling of technologies, also addressing institutional and power dynamics that affect inclusion and exclusion of actors (Klerkx and Rose, 2020; Kok et al., 2021; Rose et al., 2021; Wigboldus et al., 2016).”
• Food systems everywhere: Improving relevance in practice (2020, background): “Adequate upscaling of business innovations and tailoring public investments toward equity goals can be better guaranteed under conditions of equal access, broad and diverse stakeholder participation, and transparency of governance regimes (Wigboldus et al., 2016).”