Search

Purpose: Little is known about effective ways to operationalize agricultural innovation processes. We use the MasAgro program in Mexico (which aims to increase maize and wheat productivity, profitability and sustainability), and the experiences of middle level "hub managers", to understand how innovation processes occur in heterogeneous and changing contexts. Design/methodology/approach: We use a comparative case study analysis involving research tools such as documentary review, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and reflection workshops with key actors. Findings: Our research shows how a program, that initially had a relatively narrow technology focus, evolved towards an innovation system approach. The adaptive management of such a process was in response to context-specific challenges and opportunities. In the heterogeneous context of Mexico this results in diverse ways of operationalization at the hub level, leading to different collaborating partners and technology portfolios. Practical implications: MasAgro experiences merit analysis in the light of national public efforts to transform agricultural advisory services and accommodate pluralistic agricultural extension approaches in Latin America. Such efforts need long-term coherent macro level visions, frameworks and support, while the serendipitous nature of the process requires meso-level implementers to respond and adapt to and move the innovation process forward. Originality/value: This paper contributes to the debate on how to operationalize large programs by showing that the innovation support arrangements enacted in the field should allow for diversity and have a degree of flexibility to accommodate heterogeneous demands from farmers in different contexts as well as continuous changes in the politico-institutional environment.

Purpose: New approaches to extension service delivery are needed that stimulate increased agricultural production, contribute to collective action and which also foster the emergence of agricultural innovation systems. Research in Peru and Mexico explores some of these new approaches. Design/methodology/approach: In both countries, a qualitative value chain mapping methodology was used to explore the challenges of providing extension provision to resource-poor farmers in ways that stimulate collective action and agricultural innovation systems. Findings: In Peru, collective action and the development of an agriculture innovation system required the network broker activities of initially a non-governmental organization (NGO) and then increasingly trusted local farmers known as Kamayoq. In Mexico, collective action took place in the context of a linear transfer-of-technology approach focused on access to improved maize seed and there was no evidence of the emergence of innovation networks. Practical implications: Different extension modalities can foster collective action but this in itself is not enough to encourage innovation. Extension needs to focus on combining collective action with networking amongst sets of heterogeneous value chain actors. Originality/value: The Peruvian and Mexican case studies demonstrate that the debate about the modalities of pluralistic and diversified extension systems has obscured the reality that the development community still has some way to go to achieve comprehensively the paradigm shift from a linear transfer-of-technology approach to one that supports the emergence of agricultural innovation systems.