IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/732.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation systems governance in Bolivia: Lessons for agricultural innovation policies

Author

Listed:
  • Hartwich, Frank
  • Alexaki, Anastasia
  • Baptista, Rene

Abstract

"Traditional approaches to innovation systems policymaking and governance often focus exclusively on the central provision of services, regulations, fiscal measures, and subsidies. This study, however, considers that innovation systems policymaking and governance also has to do with the structures and procedures decision makers set up to provide incentives for innovating agents and the interaction and collaboration among them, thus enabling innovation. Based on the concepts of agent-centered institutionalism and innovation systems, governance can be understood to refer to integrating multiple government and non-government actors in different actor constellations depending on roles, mandates, and strategic visions. Any effort to govern the system composed of those agents needs to take into account the limitations that any policymaking body has in dictating how agents behave and interact. In consequence governance in innovation systems has less to do with executing research and administering extension services and more to do with guiding diverse actors involved in complex innovation processes through the rules and incentives that foster the creation, application, and diffusion of knowledge and technologies. The report presents results from a study that analyzed to what extent the Bolivian Agricultural Technology System (SIBTA), as part of the country's agricultural innovation system, has complied with a set of governance principles—including participation of stakeholders (especially small farmers) in decision making, transparency and openness, responsiveness and accountability, consensus orientation and coherence, and strategic vision—and compares those principles with benchmarks of innovation systems governance in five other developing countries. Data in Bolivia were collected by means of an expert consultation and interviews with a wide range of key actors and stakeholders from various organizations involved in agricultural innovation in the system. The empirical findings of the study suggest the following: A research and technology transfer program such as SIBTA constitutes only part of an innovation system and there are other important complementary functions with which the government has to comply to foster innovation. Rather than aiming to carry out research and extension, governments should focus on overall planning on the macro level and bringing the above functions together so they reach the innovating agents. To do this they need to involve themselves in planning and policy analysis, the setting of consultation platforms, supporting the building of innovation networks, and setting up specific funding mechanisms. Setting up decentralized semiautonomous agencies that administer funds and design innovation projects does not automatically lead to sufficient participation of local producer organizations and technology providers. More participation requires special rules and incentives to collaborate and the special efforts of all involved, and eventually further decentralization on the regional level. Weak leadership and limited commitment, rather than a decentralized structure or the delegation of too much power, have prevented governments from taking a more active role in governing their innovation systems. Decentralization, however, should not stand in the way of a national strategic vision, and mechanisms need to be put in place to discuss and harmonize national- and local-level priorities. Simply being responsive to the demands of farmers does not necessarily imply that one is generating the best technical solutions. Generating adequate innovations requires the participation of many: leading and other producers, knowledge and technology providers, buyers, input sellers, funding agencies, advisory services, and others. It also requires analysis and identification of technological and market opportunities. Policymakers should foster in-depth analysis of farmers' demands on the local level through decentralized organizations, which simultaneously help to orient these demands to where technological and market opportunities lie. This requires improved analytical and planning capacities as well as intensive communication with the farmers and agents who benefit from new and promising technologies." from Authors' Abstract

Suggested Citation

  • Hartwich, Frank & Alexaki, Anastasia & Baptista, Rene, 2007. "Innovation systems governance in Bolivia: Lessons for agricultural innovation policies," IFPRI discussion papers 732, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:732
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifpri.org/cdmref/p15738coll2/id/125276/filename/125277.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Birner, Regina & Davis, Kristin & Pender, John & Nkonya, Ephraim & Anandajayasekeram, Ponniah & Ekboir, Javier & Mbabu, Adiel & Spielman, David & Horna, Daniela & Benin, Samuel & Cohen, Marc J., 2006. "From "best practice" to "best fit": a framework for designing and analyzing pluralistic agricultural advisory services worldwide," FCND discussion papers 210, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Birner, Regina & Davis, Kristin & Pender, John & Nkonya, Ephraim & Anandajayasekeram, Pooniah & Ekboir, Javier M. & Mbabu, Adiel N. & Spielman, David J. & Horna, Daniela & Benin, Samuel & Kisamba-Muge, 2006. "From "best practice" to "best fit": a framework for designing and analyzing pluralistic agricultural advisory services," Research briefs 4, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Alberto Melo, 2001. "Industrial Policy in Latin America and the Caribbean at the Turn of the Century," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 6492, Inter-American Development Bank.
    4. Björn Johnson & Olman Segura-Bonilla, 2001. "Innovation Systems and Developing Countries Experiences from the SUDESCA Project," DRUID Working Papers 01-12, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    5. R. Kaplinsky, 2000. "Globalisation and Unequalisation: What Can Be Learned from Value Chain Analysis?," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 117-146.
    6. World Bank, 2006. "Enhancing Agricultural Innovation," World Bank Publications - Reports 24105, The World Bank Group.
    7. Keynan, Gabriel & Olin, Manuel & Dinar, Ariel, 1997. "Cofinanced Public Extension in Nicaragua," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 12(2), pages 225-247, August.
    8. Alberto Melo, 2001. "The Innovation Systems of Latin America and the Caribbean," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 6493, Inter-American Development Bank.
    9. Hall, Andrew & Mytelka, Lynn & Oyeyinka, Banji, 2005. "Innovation Systems: Implications for agricultural policy and practice," ILAC Briefs 52512, Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative.
    10. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2000. "Institutions in comparative policy research," MPIfG Working Paper 00/3, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    11. Pierre, Jon (ed.), 2000. "Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198297727.
    12. Altenburg, Tilman & Meyer-Stamer, JORG, 1999. "How to Promote Clusters: Policy Experiences from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(9), pages 1693-1713, September.
    13. Alcorta, Ludovico & Peres, Wilson, 1995. "Innovation Systems and Technological Specialization in Latin America and the Caribbean," UNU-INTECH Discussion Paper Series 1995-09, United Nations University - INTECH.
    14. Chaminade, Cristina & Edquist, Charles, 2005. "From theory to practice: the use of systems of innovation approach in innovation policy," Papers in Innovation Studies 2005/2, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    15. M. Cimoli, 1998. "National System of Innovation: A Note on Technological Asymmetries and Catching-Up Perspectives," Working Papers ir98030, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    16. Grootaert, Christiaan & Narayan, Deepa, 2001. "Local institutions, poverty, and household welfare in Bolivia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2644, The World Bank.
    17. Melo, Alberto, 2001. "Industrial Policy in Latin America and the Caribbean at the Turn of the Century," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 6088, Inter-American Development Bank.
    18. Gereffi, Gary, 1999. "International trade and industrial upgrading in the apparel commodity chain," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 37-70, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Diana Córdoba & Kees Jansen & Carolina González, 2014. "The Malleability of Participation: The Politics of Agricultural Research under Neoliberalism in Bolivia," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 45(6), pages 1284-1309, November.
    2. Diana Córdoba, 2017. "Politización, participación e innovación: socializando la investigación agrícola en Bolivia," Apuntes. Revista de ciencias sociales, Fondo Editorial, Universidad del Pacífico, vol. 44(81), pages 131-160.
    3. Shikha N. Khera & Karishma Gulati, 2015. "Training Methods and Tacit Knowledge Sharing: Evidence from IT Organizations," Jindal Journal of Business Research, , vol. 4(1-2), pages 11-26, June.
    4. Diana Córdoba, 2017. "Politization, participation, and innovation:Socializing agricultural research in Bolivia," Apuntes. Revista de ciencias sociales, Fondo Editorial, Universidad del Pacífico, vol. 44(81), pages 123-150.
    5. Ton, Giel & Klerkx, Laurens & de Grip, Karin & Rau, Marie-Luise, 2015. "Innovation grants to smallholder farmers: Revisiting the key assumptions in the impact pathways," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-23.
    6. World Bank, 2010. "Designing and implementing Agricultural Innovation Funds : Lessons from Competitive Research and Matching Grant Projects," World Bank Publications - Reports 12614, The World Bank Group.
    7. Ramazan Uctu & Hassan Essop, 2012. "The Role of the South African Government in Developing the Biotechnology Industry – from Biotechnology Regional Innovation Centres to the Technology Innovation Agency," Working Papers 19/2012, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
    8. Giel Ton, 2017. "Contribution analysis of a Bolivian innovation grant fund: mixing methods to verify relevance, efficiency and effectiveness," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 120-143, January.

    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. Melo, Alberto, 2001. "The Innovation Systems of Latin America and the Caribbean," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 1429, Inter-American Development Bank.
    2. Marion Werner & Jennifer Bair & Victor Ramiro Fernández, 2014. "Linking Up to Development? Global Value Chains and the Making of a Post-Washington Consensus," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 45(6), pages 1219-1247, November.
    3. Roberta Rabellotti & Alessia Amighini, 2003. "The effect of globalisation on industrial districts in Italy: evidence from the footwear sector," ERSA conference papers ersa03p500, European Regional Science Association.
    4. Emanuela Todeva & Ruslan Rakhmatullin, 2016. "Industry Global Value Chains, Connectivity and Regional Smart Specialisation in Europe. An Overview of Theoretical Approaches and Mapping Methodologies," JRC Research Reports JRC102801, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Stefan Pahl & Marcel P. Timmer, 2020. "Do Global Value Chains Enhance Economic Upgrading? A Long View," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(9), pages 1683-1705, July.
    6. Anna Giunta & Domenico Scalera & Francesco Trivieri & Jeffrey B. Nugent & Mariarosaria Agostino, 2011. "Firm Productivity, Organizational Choice and Global Value Chain," Working Papers 2011R09, Orkestra - Basque Institute of Competitiveness.
    7. Islam, Md. Saidul, 2008. "From pond to plate: Towards a twin-driven commodity chain in Bangladesh shrimp aquaculture," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 209-223, June.
    8. Niels Beerepoot, 2008. "The Benefits of Learning in Clusters: Analyzing Upward Mobility for Skilled Workers in the Cebu Furniture Cluster," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(10), pages 2435-2452, October.
    9. Slavo Radosevic, 2003. "The emerging industrial architecture of the wider Europe: The co-evolution of industrial and political structures," UCL SSEES Economics and Business working paper series 29, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES).
    10. Zhihui Dai & Yue Niu & Hongru Zhang & Xiaodi Niu, 2022. "Impact of the Transforming and Upgrading of China’s Labor-Intensive Manufacturing Industry on the Labor Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-25, October.
    11. Alberto Melo, 2001. "Industrial Policy in Latin America and the Caribbean at the Turn of the Century," Research Department Publications 4281, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    12. Pham, Hanh Song Thi & Petersen, Bent, 2021. "The bargaining power, value capture, and export performance of Vietnamese manufacturers in global value chains," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(6).
    13. Pietrobelli, Carlo & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2011. "Global Value Chains Meet Innovation Systems: Are There Learning Opportunities for Developing Countries?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 1261-1269, July.
    14. Satyaki Roy, 2017. "Rent and Surplus in the Global Production Network: Identifying ‘Value Capture’ from the South," Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy, Centre for Agrarian Research and Education for South, vol. 6(1), pages 32-52, April.
    15. Melo, Alberto & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2006. "Productive Development Policies and Supporting Institutions in Latin America and The Caribbean," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 3358, Inter-American Development Bank.
    16. McWilliam, Sarah E. & Kim, Jung Kwan & Mudambi, Ram & Nielsen, Bo Bernhard, 2020. "Global value chain governance: Intersections with international business," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(4).
    17. Paulina Ramirez & Helen Rainbird, 2010. "Making the connections: bringing skill formation into global value chain analysis," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 24(4), pages 699-710, December.
    18. Lila Margarita Bada Carbajal & Luis Arturo Rivas Tovar & Herman FrankLittlewood Zimmerman, 2017. "Model of associativity in the production chain in Agroindustrial SMEs," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 62(4), pages 1118-1135, Octubre-D.
    19. von Geibler, Justus & Kristof, Kora & Bienge, Katrin, 2010. "Sustainability assessment of entire forest value chains: Integrating stakeholder perspectives and indicators in decision support tools," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(18), pages 2206-2214.
    20. Suder, Gabriele & Liesch, Peter W. & Inomata, Satoshi & Mihailova, Irina & Meng, Bo, 2015. "The evolving geography of production hubs and regional value chains across East Asia: Trade in value-added," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 404-416.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural innovations; Governance; Innovation Policy; Agricultural Innovation System;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:fpr:ifprid:732. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    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.