Multi-stakeholder Innovation Research Articles

Multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam to meet the societal challenges of horizon 2020

This paper aimed at enlightening the emergence of multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam that enable individuals, businesses, and civic societies to undertake the complex sustainability issues in the international business environment. Currently, the philosophy of involving multi-stakeholder initiatives groups in Vietnam for resource management seems overwhelming. Equally, the motive for studying a phenomenon like multi-stakeholder dialogue is a novel outlook that did not catch various researchers’ eye earlier. Nowadays, the European multi-stakeholder innovation platform tries to address the European societal challenges and policies due to their roles in the upcoming new program of Horizon 2020. National policy makers using them as building blocks for implementing different strategies such as research and development and regional policies. The approach of multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam is to respond to the limited capacity and resources of individuals, societal sectors, governments, businesses, and civic societies. Thus, this study was conducted to demonstrate the significance of multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam that create a broad multi-stakeholder (science, policy, business, society, including SMEs, public and private investors) and multi-level (local, regional, national, and Europe) innovation platforms to meet a range of societal challenges through Horizon 2020 in order to facilitate the development of committed innovation partnerships and identify how different types of firms, people, and knowledge at national and international levels making civil society organizations, non-governmental organizations, and individuals and institutions more innovative and competitive. Finally, this paper proposed some recommendations based on assumptions underlying research questions that added value to promote dialogue and collaboration across levels and with key international partners.

The Role of Journalism in Dialogic Innovation Processes—the Case of the Helsinki Deaconess Institute Multi-stakeholder Workshops

Journalists are increasingly invited to engage in dialogic innovation processes not only to report on innovations but also take part in identifying social problems and co-creating possible solutions. We analyze a series of multi-stakeholder innovation workshops at the health care social enterprise group Helsinki Deaconess Institute in Finland from 2012 to 2014 and the mediated results of the workshops. Journalists were part of all three stages in the innovation process: the creation of a holding space for innovation, creating concrete innovations, and communicating the outcomes at the level of mass communication. We suggest the model of participatory solutions journalism that could, in part, help open the gridlock journalism faces with corroding legitimacy from the outside and resistance to innovation from the inside. Our study builds on previous research suggesting that journalism should be seen as the “fourth strand” of the innovation ecosystem elements alongside the industry, the academia, and the government (Carayannis and Campell 2012; Bast et al. 2015). We add to this literature the finding that such a co-creating role can be supported by dialogic organizational development methods (Scharmer and Kaufer 2013; Bohm et al. 1991; Bohm 1996; Senge 1990). The pitfall of participatory solutions journalism includes the possible corrosion of journalistic impartiality.

Motivation and participation in multi-stakeholder innovation platforms in the Great Lakes Region of Africa

AbstractThe relationship between motivation and participation in five agricultural research and development innovation platforms (IPs) in Africa's Great Lakes Region is examined. We analyze data from surveys and in-depth interviews, and focus group discussions. Although farmers prioritized new knowledge and skills, these were not sufficient to consistently foster active participation. Anticipated economic (markets, income, and credit) and material (agricultural inputs) livelihood benefits did encourage active farmer participation. Few actors mentioned social incentives (network connections and status) as motivating factors. Participation of local policy makers and the private business sector was limited. Overall, participation was curtailed by unfulfilled expectations of tangible immediate benefits, limited understanding of the IP concept, lack of resources, and prior commitments.

Governing Quintuple Helix Innovation: Urban Living Labs and Socio-Ecological Entrepreneurship

Growing urbanization puts pressure on both social and ecological systems. This pressure raises complex and multi-facetted challenges that can only be tackled by collaborative and distributed innovation development processes. However, theoretical frameworks that assess such collaborations are often very conceptual, with little focus on the actual governance mechanisms that facilitate them. This article studies the urban living lab concept as an inter-organizational design and multi-stakeholder innovation development process to govern the quintuple helix model for innovation by means of an action research based multidimensional case study design, which focuses on the concepts of innovation democracy, mode 3 knowledge production, the innovation ecosystem as a system of societal subsystems, and socio-ecological transition. In this way, we provide a more profound understanding of such innovation processes to tackle socio-ecological challenges by means of public–private interactions driven by eco-entrepreneurship. Cities are never random. No matter how chaotic they might seem, everything about them grows out of a need to solve a problem. In fact, a city is nothing more than a solution to a problem, that in turn creates more problems that need more solutions, until towers rise, roads widen, bridges are built, and millions of people are caught up in a mad race to feed the problem-solving, problem-creating frenzy. Neal Shusterman Author of young-adult fiction In Downsiders (2001)

Leveraging value in multi-stakeholder innovation networks: A process framework for value co-creation and capture

To develop innovative solutions for complex societal and scientific challenges, organizations need to move beyond the boundaries of single firms and engage in collaborative networks. In these networks, multiple, diverse stakeholders are working together to co-create innovative value. Co-creation in a network creates new challenges in terms of changed processes and outcomes. Guided by grounded theory methodology, we explore these aspects by studying a public–private partnership involving 57 stakeholders. We take the number and diversity of stakeholders into account to shed light on the distinct processes through which value is co-created and captured. We also identify the types of value outcomes that accrue to the network and its participants. Overall, we present a multi-level cyclical process framework for leveraging value in multi-stakeholder collaborations and visualize these collaborations as a value space in which all stakeholders are uniquely positioned. In doing so, this study provides novel insights into the systemic, multi-actor nature of value co-creation and supports collaborators in maximizing value for both individual stakeholders and the network as a whole.

Enhancing farmers' organizational and experimentation capacities for soil fertility management in smallholder cropping systems in Vhembe District of Limpopo Province in South Africa

The JOLISAA project analysed a number of multi-stakeholder innovation cases in smallholder agriculture in Benin, Kenya and South Africa through a Collaborative Case Assessment process. The overriding assumption was that a comparative analysis of wide ranging innovation experiences may provide useful insights into the way that innovation processes are triggered and unfold in smallholder agricultural systems. One of the cases investigated in South Africa was from Limpopo Province. This was a project-based innovation processes, initiated to redress how agricultural and social development in rural communities should be addressed through the adoption of the Participatory Extension Approach (PEA). The approach focused on the reorientation of mindsets in Limpopo Department of Agricultural, which were still founded on the teaching of linear transfer of technology models, and where farmers were approached with a believe that extension have all the answers to farmer problems. Participatory Rural Appraisal methodologies were used to interview smallholder farmers and key informants. It was revealed that this was a case of an innovation bundle where the main innovation was an institutional innovation, with the introduction of PEA through the GTZ/BASED program. The aim was to broaden agricultural service and extension delivery to smallholder farmers in the Vhembe district. In the unpacking of the soil fertility management innovation it was revealed that the innovation consists of a number of innovations, which include technical and organisation innovations. The GTZ/BASED program trained some 700 extensionists in the PEA methodology, capacitating them to facilitate technical innovations amongst smallholders in one of four technical areas. A total of 397 villages were eventually served. The extensionists specialising in soil fertility management teamed up with a local university to redress a severe decline in soil fertility in two smallholder irrigation schemes, Rammbuda and Mphaila. Together with farmers they experimented with innovative ways like green manuring with forage legumes. These technical innovation processes created capacity amongst smallholders that triggered spontaneous farmer-initiated experimentation and innovation processes to improve smallholder farming systems and livelihoods. The key challenge identified was that decisive institutional ownership is required to sustain an enabling environment allowing innovation processes to continue beyond the project phase. The key lesson was that project initiated innovations could trigger farmer innovations and that developmental change strategies should explore such opportunities. Key words : Innovation, Soil Fertility, Smallholder Cropping, Participatory Extension Approach.

A paradigm shift in African agricultural research for development: the role of innovation platforms

To demonstrate the development impact of their outputs, agricultural research and development (R&D) organizations used to focus on the efficiency and effectiveness of technologies. In recent years, innovation systems thinking has started to address institutional and organizational barriers to technological change in African agriculture. The main approach used has been the multi-stakeholder innovation platform (IP). This paper analyses the requirements for improving the competence and skills of IPs actors in agricultural value chains, food systems, and natural resource management. As case studies, it uses IPs in the maize and cassava value chains that were initiated in the dissemination of new agricultural technologies in Africa (DONATA), in both West and Central Africa, and made reference to the rice IPs facilitated by AfricaRice. Yields and incomes in maize and cassava IPs significantly increased and inter-actor relationships and behavioural change among the diverse social and economic operators were enhanced. This achievement built on three capacity development interventions: (i) learning workshops that sensitized and informed technocrats and policy-makers and nurtured their involvement and ownership, (ii) competence and skill training of IP facilitators and practitioners, and (iii) coaching and mentoring of these facilitators and practitioners. To better facilitate IPs, facilitators and practitioners need to learn to observe, recreate, test, and perfect the IP process and value chain approach. Practicable tools that can be visualized and put into practice by the IP actors are essential. The DONATA on which the paper is based has been invaluable in terms of experiential learning.

Crowdsourcing Ideas as an Emerging Form of Multistakeholder Participation in Internet Governance

The online crowdsourcing of ideas for institutional change and legislation drafting has been widely adopted by public bodies from the local to the international level, for improving legitimacy, transparency, and accountability. In multistakeholder set-ups, such an approach seems to fulfill the promise of openness, real-time engagement and cross-fertilization of ideas. Global Internet policy-making appears as a natural experiment for harnessing the potential of crowdsourcing, in particular, as a means to restore trust after the Snowden revelations of mass surveillance. This article investigates two key initiatives of online collective brainstorming for digital policies: ICANN's Strategy Panel on Multistakeholder Innovation and the NETmundial process, highlighting the merits and limitations of crowdsourcing as an emerging form of multistakeholder participation. Our findings underscore the need for leveraging sufficient community interest for substantial input; defining procedures for the collection and screening of inputs; and committing to institutionalizing rules for incorporating feedback.

Governing Multi-Stakeholder Innovation Networks: a Value Co-Creation and Capture Process Framework

Developing innovative solutions for the complex societal problems of our time challenges traditional management practices as a more open, collaborative approach is required. In this setting, multip...

Institutional change towards sustainable agriculture in West Africa

This paper describes why inter- and trans-disciplinary research, accompanied by innovation platforms, is essential in the context of agricultural development in West Africa. The institutional context in West Africa can become a trap for smallholder farmers and for society at large. Therefore, we argue that an enabling institutional context is necessary to achieve an increase in agricultural production. This will have consequences for setting priorities of agricultural research and the way research should be organized in order to have impact. Within the framework of two consecutive programmes, attempts were made to create such an enabling context. The first programme, focusing on participatory technology development, showed that smallholders can capture only limited benefits from technologies because of their constrained opportunities. The point of departure for the second programme was that institutions explain a large portion of variance in agricultural output and that multi-stakeholder innovation platforms at local, district, and national levels are needed to create change. The paper concludes with an overview of this special issue, which provides nine case studies of institutional factors that influence smallholder innovation. Each of these case studies identifies and analyses institutional mechanisms at aggregation levels higher than the household, farm, or village.

Gardner Denver Inc, USA

Scaling of innovations is a key requirement for addressing societal challenges in sectors such as health, agriculture, and the environment. Research for development (R4D) programs, projects and other interventions struggle to make particular innovations go to scale. Current conceptualizations of scaling are often too simplistic; more systemic and multidimensional perspectives, frameworks and measures are needed. There is a gap between new complexity-aware theories and perspectives on innovation, and tools and approaches that can improve strategic and operational decision-making in R4D interventions that aim to scale innovations. This paper aims to bridge that gap by developing the key concepts and measures of Scaling Readiness. Scaling Readiness is an approach that encourages critical reflection on how ready innovations are for scaling and what appropriate actions could accelerate or enhance scaling. Scaling Readiness provides action-oriented support for (1) characterizing the innovation and innovation system; (2) diagnosing the current readiness and use of innovations as a proxy for their readiness to scale; (3) developing strategy to overcome bottlenecks for scaling; (4) facilitating and negotiating multi-stakeholder innovation and scaling processes; and (5) navigating and monitoring the implementation process to allow for adaptive management. Scaling Readiness has the potential to support evidence-based scaling strategy design, implementation and monitoring, and – if applied across multiple interventions – can be used to manage a portfolio of innovation and scaling investments.

The SusHouse Methodology. Design Orienting Scenarios for Sustainable Solutions

This paper describes the conclusions of the SusHouse (Strategies towards the Sustainable Household) Project that has been exploring possible socially and technologically innovative strategies for sustainable households.The Project has covered 3 household 'functions: Clothing Care, Shelter (Heating, Cooling and Lighting) and Food (Shopping, Cooking and Eating). These have been studied in 5 European countries (Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, and UK). The methodology of the Project has involved stakeholder workshops, the construction of design-orienting scenarios, environmental, economic and consumer assessment of the scenarios and strategy formulation. The paper describes: i. the methodology for devising Design-Orienting Scenarios, with examples from the three Functions ii. the results of environmental, economic and consumer acceptability assessments of these Scenarios iii. comments on how the methodology can be developed and applied.The methodology is specifically applicable by designers who are leading multi-stakeholder sustainable innovation processes aimed at large shifts in technology and use.