Encouraging system learning in two poultry subsectors
This article contributes to the debate on participatory approaches to bring about system changes that support sustainability and other broad innovation challenges. We report on experiences of workshops in two Dutch poultry subsectors where actors from the value chains together with a few other actors and facilitated by researchers, conducted an analysis of the structural barriers and windows of opportunity for innovation. In this way, we investigate the value of these collective system analyses in a wider approach for system innovation towards sustainable animal sectors. We expected that they would stimulate system learning among the participants: i.e. (1) recognising the multi-causality of recurrent problems, (2) redefining barriers into opportunities, and (3) designing options for collective action. The participants indeed recognised the integral and complex nature of the sustainability issues, and their commitment to sustainable development increased. However, the learning was limited in the sense that they defined few innovation opportunities and no options for collective actions. After analysing whether the workshops actively challenged the innovation barriers in the current subsectors, we conclude that the latter two dimensions of system learning seem to have been hindered by the representation of a large part of the value chains in the workshops.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-31, March.
- Ison, R. L. & Maiteny, P. T. & Carr, S., 1997. "Systems methodologies for sustainable natural resources research and development," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 257-272, October.
- Ricardo Ramirez, 2001. "Understanding the approaches for accommodating multiple stakeholders' interests," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3/4), pages 264-285.
- Jacobsson, Staffan & Johnson, Anna, 2000. "The diffusion of renewable energy technology: an analytical framework and key issues for research," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(9), pages 625-640, July.
- Horton, Douglas & Mackay, Ronald, 2003. "Using evaluation to enhance institutional learning and change: recent experiences with agricultural research and development," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 127-142, November.
- Hall, Andrew & Rasheed Sulaiman, V. & Clark, Norman & Yoganand, B., 2003. "From measuring impact to learning institutional lessons: an innovation systems perspective on improving the management of international agricultural research," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 213-241, November.
- Klerkx, Laurens & Aarts, Noelle & Leeuwis, Cees, 2010. "Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 390-400, July.
- Devaux, André & Horton, Douglas & Velasco, Claudio & Thiele, Graham & López, Gastón & Bernet, Thomas & Reinoso, Iván & Ordinola, Miguel, 2009. "Collective action for market chain innovation in the Andes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 31-38, February.
- Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:115:y:2013:i:c:p:29-40. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.