IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ssefpa/v10y2018i4d10.1007_s12571-018-0821-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking system perspectives with user perspectives to identify adoption barriers to food security innovations for smallholder farmers – evidence from rural Tanzania

Author

Listed:
  • Anett Kuntosch

    () (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin)

  • Bettina König

    (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin)

Abstract

Abstract Food insecurity remains a persistent problem, affecting one-third of Tanzania’s population. Mutually reinforcing factors that make the situation more acute include high human population growth combined with the impacts of climate change affecting agricultural productivity. This situation explains why the development and implementation of solutions to improve food security in Tanzania continues to receive substantial attention from scholars, NGOs, practitioners, government and associated bodies. Among researchers and practitioners, innovation is discussed as one possible and widely accepted pathway for improving food security. However, evidence shows that the adoption of innovations that have a potential to improve food security status, such as improved seed, fertilizer, better cooking stoves or mechanization, remains low in Tanzania. To enhance understanding about why innovations are not always successfully adopted, we took an innovation system perspective that included three analytical steps: (1) description of system arrangements on a meso- and macro level, (2) the description of farmers’ motivation for adoption or rejection on a micro-level, and (3) an integration of findings from both levels to identify entry points for purposeful intervention. This paper applied that framework to the empirical examples of two innovations, improved cooking stoves (ICS) and fertilizer micro-dosing (FMD) combined with improved soil and crop management techniques for small-scale subsistence-farmer groups in Tanzania. These interventions were part of the Trans-SEC research project. We show how system constraints, such as hampered communication and interaction across levels, had an impact on the way innovations could be implemented by farmers and how this leads to specific adoption decisions, given conditions of not-knowing or insufficient information. From these two case studies we conclude that most technical based innovations are associated with process aspects (in the case of fertilizer micro-dosing) or social aspects (with stoves).

Suggested Citation

  • Anett Kuntosch & Bettina König, 2018. "Linking system perspectives with user perspectives to identify adoption barriers to food security innovations for smallholder farmers – evidence from rural Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(4), pages 881-896, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:ssefpa:v:10:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s12571-018-0821-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s12571-018-0821-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12571-018-0821-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malerba, Franco, 2002. "Sectoral systems of innovation and production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 247-264, February.
    2. Hall, Andy, 2007. "Challenges to Strengthening Agricultural Innovation Systems: Where Do We Go From Here?," MERIT Working Papers 038, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    3. Khandelwal, Meena & Hill, Matthew E. & Greenough, Paul & Anthony, Jerry & Quill, Misha & Linderman, Marc & Udaykumar, H.S., 2017. "Why Have Improved Cook-Stove Initiatives in India Failed?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 13-27.
    4. Barham, James & Chitemi, Clarence, 2009. "Collective action initiatives to improve marketing performance: Lessons from farmer groups in Tanzania," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 53-59, February.
    5. Franco Malerba, 2005. "Sectoral systems of innovation: a framework for linking innovation to the knowledge base, structure and dynamics of sectors," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 63-82.
    6. Hermans, Frans & Stuiver, Marian & Beers, P.J. & Kok, Kasper, 2013. "The distribution of roles and functions for upscaling and outscaling innovations in agricultural innovation systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 117-128.
    7. Hounkonnou, Dominique & Kossou, Dansou & Kuyper, Thomas W. & Leeuwis, Cees & Nederlof, E. Suzanne & Röling, Niels & Sakyi-Dawson, Owuraku & Traoré, Mamoudou & van Huis, Arnold, 2012. "An innovation systems approach to institutional change: Smallholder development in West Africa," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 74-83.
    8. Janvry, Alain De & Sadoulet, Elisabeth, 2010. "Agriculture for development in sub-Saharan Africa: An update," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 1-11, September.
    9. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    10. repec:spr:ssefpa:v:9:y:2017:i:6:d:10.1007_s12571-017-0691-1 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Swaans, Kees & Cullen, Beth & van Rooyen, André & Adekunle, Adewale & Ngwenya, Hlami & Lema, Zelalem & Nederlof, Suzanne, 2016. "Dealing with critical challenges in African innovation platforms: Lessons for facilitation," IFPRI book chapters,in: Innovation for inclusive value-chain development: Successes and challenges, chapter 10, pages 303-328 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. Foran, Tira & Butler, James R.A. & Williams, Liana J. & Wanjura, Wolf J. & Hall, Andy & Carter, Lucy & Carberry, Peter S., 2014. "Taking Complexity in Food Systems Seriously: An Interdisciplinary Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 85-101.
    13. Bensch, Gunther & Peters, Jörg, 2015. "The intensive margin of technology adoption – Experimental evidence on improved cooking stoves in rural Senegal," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 44-63.
    14. repec:spr:ssefpa:v:9:y:2017:i:6:d:10.1007_s12571-017-0745-4 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:spr:ssefpa:v:10:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s12571-018-0821-4. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.