IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i6p3550-d773526.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Actor Networks in Enabling Agroecological Innovation: Lessons from Laos

Author

Listed:
  • Jean-Christophe Castella

    (IRD, UMR SENS (IRD, CIRAD, UPVM), Univ. Montpellier, F-34080 Montpellier, France)

  • Guillaume Lestrelin

    (CIRAD, UMR TETIS (Univ. Montpellier, AgroParisTech, CIRAD, CNRS, INRAE), F-34398 Montpellier, France)

  • Sisavath Phimmasone

    (DALaM (Department of Agricultural Land Management), Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Vientiane P.O. Box 4195, Laos)

  • Hoa Tran Quoc

    (CIRAD, UR GECO, Univ. Montpellier, F-34398 Montpellier, France)

  • Pascal Lienhard

    (CIRAD, UR AIDA, Univ. Montpellier, F-34398 Montpellier, France)

Abstract

In this paper, we use conceptual insights from the actor–network theory (ANT) to explore the role of agroecological innovation systems (AeISs) in the reconfiguration of agricultural practices toward sustainability. AeISs are actor networks involving a diversity of individuals (e.g., farmers, traders, experts) and organizations (e.g., cooperatives, rural development agencies, teaching and research institutions) that mainstream agroecology principles and practices to enhance agroecosystems’ resilience. Their composition and structure affect the way different agents of change interact, as well as how they access, exchange, and use knowledge as they drive the adoption of specific technologies. We document seven AeISs that were active between 2005 and 2020 in the northern uplands of Laos. Within the framework of these initiatives, action research was conducted for understanding the processes underpinning diverse technical, organizational, and institutional innovations to foster an agroecological transition. Building on a comparative analysis of AeIS, we consider how agency was distributed among collectives as they reorganized in time. Our discussion highlights the importance of configuring, enlarging, and nurturing spaces in which actors are empowered to adjust and adapt, as well as to think and act collectively in complexity. Lastly, what counts in the innovation is the underlying networking process itself, i.e., the process through which all actors of the AeIS interact and exchange. Changes in the networking processes come with a changing conception of knowledge. Moving from knowledge to knowing (i.e., knowledge in the making), AeISs no longer only promote products or technologies, but also collective intelligence based on an ethic of care.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean-Christophe Castella & Guillaume Lestrelin & Sisavath Phimmasone & Hoa Tran Quoc & Pascal Lienhard, 2022. "The Role of Actor Networks in Enabling Agroecological Innovation: Lessons from Laos," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:6:p:3550-:d:773526
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/6/3550/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/6/3550/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angelina Sanderson Bellamy & Antonio A. R. Ioris, 2017. "Addressing the Knowledge Gaps in Agroecology and Identifying Guiding Principles for Transforming Conventional Agri-Food Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    3. Totin, Edmond & van Mierlo, Barbara & Klerkx, Laurens, 2020. "Scaling practices within agricultural innovation platforms: Between pushing and pulling," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    4. World Bank, 2006. "Enhancing Agricultural Innovation," World Bank Publications - Reports 24105, The World Bank Group.
    5. Anna J. Wieczorek & Marko P. Hekkert, 2012. "Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 74-87, February.
    6. Anna J. Wieczorek & Marko P. Hekkert, 2012. "Corrigendum to 'Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars'," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 842-842, December.
    7. Schut, Marc & Klerkx, Laurens & Rodenburg, Jonne & Kayeke, Juma & Hinnou, Léonard C. & Raboanarielina, Cara M. & Adegbola, Patrice Y. & van Ast, Aad & Bastiaans, Lammert, 2015. "RAAIS: Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems (Part I). A diagnostic tool for integrated analysis of complex problems and innovation capacity," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1-11.
    8. Hamid El Bilali, 2019. "The Multi-Level Perspective in Research on Sustainability Transitions in Agriculture and Food Systems: A Systematic Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-24, April.
    9. Pigford, Ashlee-Ann E. & Hickey, Gordon M. & Klerkx, Laurens, 2018. "Beyond agricultural innovation systems? Exploring an agricultural innovation ecosystems approach for niche design and development in sustainability transitions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 116-121.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Klerkx, Laurens & Begemann, Stephanie, 2020. "Supporting food systems transformation: The what, why, who, where and how of mission-oriented agricultural innovation systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    2. Verburg, René W. & Verberne, Emma & Negro, Simona O., 2022. "Accelerating the transition towards sustainable agriculture: The case of organic dairy farming in the Netherlands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    3. Torres-Avila, Angelica & Aguilar-Ávila, Jorge & Santoyo-Cortés, Vinicio Horacio & Martínez-González, Enrique Genaro & Aguilar-Gallegos, Norman, 2022. "Innovation in the pineapple value chain in Mexico: Explaining the global adoption process of the MD-2 hybrid," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    4. Ghazinoory, Sepehr & Nasri, Shohreh & Ameri, Fatemeh & Montazer, Gholam Ali & Shayan, Ali, 2020. "Why do we need ‘Problem-oriented Innovation System (PIS)’ for solving macro-level societal problems?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    5. Maru, Yiheyis & Sparrow, Ashley & Stirzaker, Richard & Davies, Jocelyn, 2018. "Integrated agricultural research for development (IAR4D) from a theory of change perspective," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 310-320.
    6. McMeekin, Andrew & Geels, Frank W. & Hodson, Mike, 2019. "Mapping the winds of whole system reconfiguration: Analysing low-carbon transformations across production, distribution and consumption in the UK electricity system (1990–2016)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1216-1231.
    7. Bellink, Miriam & Verburg, René W., 2023. "A system lock-in blocks the uptake of mixed sustainable Eucalyptus plantations in Brazil," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    8. Fabíola Sostmeyer Polita & Lívia Madureira, 2021. "Transition Pathways of Agroecological Innovation in Portugal’s Douro Wine Region. A Multi-Level Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    9. Konstantinos Karanasios & Paul Parker, 2018. "Explaining the Diffusion of Renewable Electricity Technologies in Canadian Remote Indigenous Communities through the Technological Innovation System Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-28, October.
    10. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    11. Walrave, Bob & Talmar, Madis & Podoynitsyna, Ksenia S. & Romme, A. Georges L. & Verbong, Geert P.J., 2018. "A multi-level perspective on innovation ecosystems for path-breaking innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 103-113.
    12. Paula Kivimaa & Wouter Boon & Sampsa Hyysalo & Laurens Klerkx, 2017. "Towards a Typology of Intermediaries in Transitions: a Systematic Review," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-17, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    13. Raven, Rob & Walrave, Bob, 2020. "Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes in the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    14. van Rijnsoever, Frank J., 2020. "Meeting, mating, and intermediating: How incubators can overcome weak network problems in entrepreneurial ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    15. Cees Leeuwis & Birgit K. Boogaard & Kwesi Atta-Krah, 2021. "How food systems change (or not): governance implications for system transformation processes," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(4), pages 761-780, August.
    16. Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob, 2016. "Modelling the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1833-1844.
    17. Rogge, Karoline S. & Pfluger, Benjamin & Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010–2050)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    18. Schut, Marc & Klerkx, Laurens & Rodenburg, Jonne & Kayeke, Juma & Hinnou, Léonard C. & Raboanarielina, Cara M. & Adegbola, Patrice Y. & van Ast, Aad & Bastiaans, Lammert, 2015. "RAAIS: Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems (Part I). A diagnostic tool for integrated analysis of complex problems and innovation capacity," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1-11.
    19. Contesse, Maria & Duncan, Jessica & Legun, Katharine & Klerkx, Laurens, 2021. "Unravelling non-human agency in sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    20. Haddad, Carolina R. & Bergek, Anna, 2023. "Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:6:p:3550-:d:773526. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.