Session 10: Creating an enabling environment for industry-driven fruit fly area-wide management

biosecurity built on science

Creating an enabling environment for fruit fly area-wide management

Heleen KrugerPhD Candidate

Plant Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre


Background - area-wide management (AWM)

Promoted to local industries ‘Local industries need help to help themselves’

– AWM more than implementation of technologies Local industries need to be able to readily meet their needs Agricultural innovation systems thinking

– Innovation requires co-evolving technological, social, organisational, and institutional change


Evolution of agriculture innovation (Schut et al. 2012)

Transfer of technology

• 1950s – 1980s• Transfer,

adoption and adoption of technologies

• Top-down• Grower is

adopter• Researcher is

expert

Farming systems

• 1980s – 1990s• Contextualise

research and technology

• Top-down• Grower is

adopter and info source

• Researcher is expert

Agricultural knowledge and

information systems

• 1990s-2000s• Build local capacity &

empower farmers• Bottom-up• Grower is

experimenter and expert

• Researcher is capacity builder and facilitator of learning

Agricultural innovation systems

• 2000s onwards• Includes political and

institutional dimensions• Multi-directional• Grower is partner,

entrepreneur • Researchers are actors

that enhance innovation capacity

• Both innovation partners


Theoretical approach – Functional analysis

FunctionsF1. Entrepreneurial activitiesF2. Knowledge developmentF3. Knowledge diffusionF4. Guidance of searchF5. Market formationF6. Mobilisation of resourcesF7. Creation of legitimacy

From Hekkert, 2007


Methods

Interviews

Grower survey

Allocated findings against

functions

Identified systemic problems

Clustered into

blocking mechanism

s

Identified policy inter-

ventions


Blocking mechanisms

Lack of local capacity

Difficult task– Achieving a local shared vision is challenging– Reliance on voluntary approaches– Systems approaches require extensive procedures

Local barriers– Various barriers hinder local government involvement– Many growers are risk averse


Blocking mechanisms

F1. Entrepreneurial activities

F2. Knowledge development

F3. Knowledge diffusion

F4. Guidance of search

F5. Market formation F6. Mobilisation of resources

F7. Creation of legitimacy







Blocking mechanisms

Weak link between local industries and

broader system

Knowledge diffusion to growers is weak– Generic information insufficient– Inadequate extension– Crop consultant employment varies– Trade information is not readily accessible

Lack of multi-directional information flow– Lack of short feedback loops – Growers may underappreciate higher level efforts– Possible overoptimism at higher levels– “Grower voice” weak in higher level forums– Limited learning between AWM programs– No one understands the entire system, different “languages”


Blocking mechanisms


broader system



broader system





F5. Market formation F6. Mobilisation of resources

F7. Creation of legitimacy



Policy intervention recommendations

Offer local trainingDifferent modules

Invest in local knowledge-brokersBoundary functions:

– Demand articulation – Knowledge translation – Network building


Policy intervention recommendations

Multi-level innovation platforms Collaborations involving different knowledge systems Existing innovation platforms:

- Local management groups- Higher level groups

Need to introduce linkages throughout system to ensure co-evolution Next research step:

How to strengthen linkages throughout QFly management innovation system, especially including the local level?


Questions and acknowledgements

AcknowledgementsProf. Darren Halpin, Australian National UniversityProf. Rolf Gerritsen, Charles Darwin UniversityDr. Susie Collins, DAWRDr. Michael Cole, previously Australian Department of Agriculture

Any questions?Heleen [email protected]

Science

Session 10: Creating an enabling environment for industry-driven fruit fly area-wide management