Food insecurity is one of the social problems that has been affecting millions of people in

Zimbabwe and thus requires the development and implementation of initiatives earmarked at
curbing the rampant and persistent challenge that is confronting society. This has partly been
attributed to several other challenges that are inherent within the country such challenges include
the fragile economy characterised by high levels of unemployment and high inflation. In
addition, climate change poor and weather conditions including erratic rainfall and long dry
spells have also been attributed to food insecurity in the country. In March 2019, Cyclone Idai hit
Zimbabwe causing cyclone-induced rains, catastrophic floodings and massive landslides. Then,
six months later, the country dealt with “extreme drought in the middle of peak farming season.
This crisis came amid recovery from the major 2014-16 El Nino-induced drought. Zimbabwe’s
economy is significantly agriculture-based, with subsistence farmers making up about 75% of
the population in 2020 and responsible for producing most of Zimbabwe’s food sources
(Dhiliwayo et al., 2022). Such back-to-back climate-related disasters are detrimental to the
production of maize, a water-intensive crop and the principal food crop, and overall harvests
(Lengnick, 2022). Due to poor rains and erratic weather conditions impacting livelihoods, during
the 2019-2020 lean season, about 5.5 million rural Zimbabweans suffered from food insecurity
(Muderedzi, 2022). The 2022 Zimbabwe Vulnerability Assessment (ZIMVAC) report projected
3.8 million rural individuals to be food insecure at the height of the 2022/23 lean season in
Zimbabwe. This figure represents approximately a 9.8% change from the 5-year average and a
29.8% increase from the 2021/22 consumption year. This is mainly a result of a high shock
exposure index, with many households reporting to have been exposed to several shocks. The
main shocks to livelihoods were drought, intra-seasonal dry spells, floods, water logging, crop
and livestock diseases, and the longer-term impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic. These reduced
the coping capacity of many vulnerable households. The intra-seasonal dry spell experienced
from February to March of 2022, had devastating impacts on agricultural production, especially
in the non-surplus-producing areas of Zimbabwe. Against this background of the food insecurity
problem in Zimbabwe, this essay further seeks to explain social innovation using the social
innovation life cycle.

According to Ravazzoli et al. (2021), social innovation refers to the design and implementation
of new solutions that imply conceptual, process, product, or organisational change, which
ultimately aim to improve the welfare and well-being of individuals and communities. In the
context of this essay, social innovation entails measures that can be implemented to curb the
problem of food insecurity in Zimbabwe, specifically, the development of new drought
resistance crop varieties. According to Caulier-Grice et al. (2012), the core elements of social
innovation are novelty, from ideas to implementation, meeting a social need, effectiveness and
enhancing society’s capacity to act. One of the tools that has been developed to design, diffuse
and support social innovation is the social innovation life cycle proposed by Murray et al.
(2010). The cycle is composed of six stages which are: (1) Prompts, (2) Proposals, (3)
Prototyping (4) Sustaining, (5), Scaling, and (6) Systemic change.

According to Caulier-Grice et al. (2012), the first stage of any social innovation involves
prompts that highlight the need for innovation. These according to the authors come in the form
of unexpected changes in the immediate external environment, for example, a sudden
environmental or political crisis. According to Chueri and Araujo (2018), prompts may also
come in the form of a longer-term crisis that becomes more acute and demands action. The
emergence of new evidence, data or research can also provide a major prompt (Evers and Ewert,
2015). In the context of the social problem under consideration (food insecurity), this involves
observing the frequency of dry spells induced by climate change which is then leading to
droughts and food shortages. Food insecurity can be observed by taking into account agricultural
output and comparing it to the quantity that is needed to sustain a society. Conducting studies
such as the previously mentioned Zimbabwe Vulnerability Assessment (ZIMVAC) can also
assist society and policymakers to uncover the magnitude of the problem as well as the solutions
that be implemented to match the social problem.

The second stage of the social innovation cycle involves generating a new idea that provides
solutions to the identified need. According to Caulier-Grice et al. (2012), in some cases, this
stage will follow naturally from the identification of need, for example, working with the same
group and research techniques to identify potential solutions. At other times, it might involve a
new practice or technique. Using creativity-supporting methods such as design thinking, crowd-
sourcing, or competitions helps to generate new approaches and perspectives to the problem.
Collaboration and participation in this phase are important to prompt social innovation
(Neumeier, 2017). Combining different logic and perspectives is a creative process that is
necessary for innovation. In the context of the current study, the realization of drought-induced
food insecurity requires society to come up with proposals and ideas to tackle food insecurity.
For instance, the realization of frequent dry spells that are affecting agricultural output can be
tackled by the introduction of new and dry-resistant seed varieties that can flourish even during
dry spells, especially in areas that receive low rainfall. At this stage, as proposed by Caulier-
Grice et al. (2012) policymakers can collaborate with researchers and scientists to come up with
different varieties of drought-resistant seeds.

The third stage of the social innovation cycle involves prototyping which involves the idea
generated in stage 2. According to Caulier-Grice et al. (2012), usually, ideas are introduced and
then adjusted in light of experience. According to Hillgren et al. (2011), experimentation, rapid
learning, trial and error and even the accidental are all important elements of the innovation
process. There are many methods in use for testing ideas and refining them and these range from
visualisations, simulations, sketches and paper prototypes to more formal randomised control
trials, pilots and experiments. The processes of testing, trial and error and experimentation are
important not only for refining a concept but also as ways of building up an evidence base about
the impact of an idea, which is crucial for attracting further funding (Caulier-Grice et al. 2012).
In the context of the food security issue under consideration, this would therefore entail trials,
pilots and simulations to ascertain the feasibility and success of the developed draught resistance
seeds. This would be intended to establish the level of drought tolerance and the possible output
likely to be achieved or realised with a specific amount of the newly developed seeds.

According to Caulier-Grice et al. (2012), the fourth stage is about taking an idea that has shown
promise as a pilot or prototype and turning it into an established initiative that can be sustained
over time. This means developing an economic model that will secure a financial future. While
there has been less treatment of this stage in the analysis of social innovation, the early stage of
idea generation and later stage of scaling tend to generate much more interest, this middle phase
is where much of the hardest work is done and the toughest decisions are taken (Caulier-Grice et
al., 2012). According to Bretos et al. (2020), a venture driven by a social mission has an interest
in its innovation being spread as widely as possible in order to generate the greatest social
impact. This is often at odds with its commercial interests. So, one of the main challenges is to
remain open and collaborative while surviving financially. In the case of the development of
drought-resistant seeds as a social innovation to tackle food insecurity in Zimbabwe, this stage
involves acknowledging that the innovation needs to address a public concern as well as a
commercial concern. In this regard, there is a need to develop a model that will ensure that the
public is served and the organisations involved in the development of the innovation are also
sustainable and able to produce more seeds and at the same time develop more and improved
varieties. Thus, the issue of funding, legality, communication, accounting systems and
management of the innovation so as to ensure its sustainability once spread or initiated.

The fifth stage of the social innovation cycle has to do with scaling and diffusion and involves
growing social innovations. According to Caulier-Grice et al. (2012), there are many routes to
growth and these span from organisational growth to licensing and franchising to federations and
looser diffusion. Some of these approaches involve organisational growth. Others involve much
more organic processes of diffusion, with ideas spreading and adapting rather than growing
through a single organisation. Matos et al. (2022) argue that the most influential social ideas
have spread not through the growth of an organisation but through emulation. In addition,
growing an innovation depends on effective supply and effective demand. Effective supply refers
to the growth of evidence to show that the innovation really works. Effective demand refers to
the willingness to pay. Both are needed, but sometimes the first priority is to prove effectiveness
while in other cases the priority is to create demand, both by persuading people that there is a
need to be met, and then persuading people or organisations with the ability to pay that they
should do so (Caulier-Grice et al., 2012).

According to Caulier-Grice et al. (2012), the common model for diffusion is that of an ‘S’ curve,
starting slowly at first, diffusion then accelerates significantly before tailing off as the last
segment of late adopters take up the innovation. In part, this occurs because of information
asymmetries. According to Murray et al. (2010), through regulation and public procurement,
governments can overcome some of the problems associated with information asymmetries and
help accelerate the widespread adoption of social innovations. In addition, as social innovations
address large groups of people instead of individual consumers, a third party such as state
institutions or foundations has to pay for further development (Oeij et al., 2019). In the case of
drought-resistant seeds, this stage entails introducing these drought-resistance seeds to both
subsistence and commercial farmers and communicating the benefits that can be derived from
using the newly developed varieties. As with any innovation, as postulated by Murray et al.
(2010), the diffusion process can take time with some adopting the innovation early and some
later after ascertaining the efficacy of the innovation, in this regard, governments and other
agents need to chip in, subsidise the innovation, share information and encourage farmers to
adopt these seed varieties so as to expedite food security in the country.

The final stage of the social innovation cycle is social change. According to Caulier-Grice et al.
(2012), social innovations are inherently about changing the way things are done and the way
social needs are conceptualised. In this sense, systemic change is the ultimate goal of social
innovation, even if very few social innovations reach this stage (Chueri and Aruajo, 2018). In the
context of the social innovation under discussion, this would entail a change in farmers’ choices
and perceptions regarding agriculture, acknowledging climate change and its impacts on their
livelihoods, particularly, food security issues and completely adopting the newly developed
drought-resistant crops developed.

In conclusion, the issue of food security in Zimbabwe is a menace to society and due to climate
change-induced dry spells, food insecurity is likely going to escalate to unsuitable levels if
nothing is done to address the social issue. In this regard, social innovations are required to curb
food insecurity in Zimbabwe. The social innovation cycle can thus be a model that can be used to
design and implementation of new solutions to food insecurity in Zimbabwe.
References

Bretos, I., Díaz-Foncea, M. and Marcuello, C., 2020. International expansion of social
enterprises as a catalyst for scaling up social impact across borders. Sustainability, 12(8), p.3262.

Chueri, L. and Araujo, R., 2018. How social innovation projects are managed? Answers from a
literature review. European Public & Social Innovation Review, 3(2), pp.23-38.

Dhliwayo, I., Mutanga, C.N., Mashapa, C., Muboko, N. and Gandiwa, E., 2022. Climate
Variability Impacts and Coping Strategies in Malipati Communal Area, Chiredzi District,
Southeast Zimbabwe. International Journal of Ecology, 2022.

Evers, A. and Ewert, B., 2015. Social innovation for social cohesion. In New frontiers in social
innovation research (pp. 107-127). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

Hillgren, P.A., Seravalli, A. and Emilson, A., 2011. Prototyping and infrastructuring in design
for social innovation. CoDesign, 7(3-4), pp.169-183.

Lengnick, L., 2022. Resilient Agriculture: Expanded & Updated Second Edition: Cultivating
Food Systems for a Changing Climate. New Society Publishers.

Matos, S., Viardot, E., Sovacool, B.K., Geels, F.W. and Xiong, Y., 2022. Innovation and climate
change: A review and introduction to the special issue. Technovation, p.102612.

Muderedzi, J., 2022. FOOD INSECURITY, LIVELIHOOD-DIVERSIFICATION

STRATEGIES AND GENDER AMONG THE TONGA OF BINGA DISTRICT. Tonga
Livelihoods in Rural Zimbabwe, p.23.

Neumeier, S., 2017. Social innovation in rural development: identifying the key factors of
success. The geographical journal, 183(1), pp.34-46.

Oeij, P.R., Van Der Torre, W., Vaas, F. and Dhondt, S., 2019. Understanding social innovation
as an innovation process: Applying the innovation journey model. Journal of Business Research,
101, pp.243-254.

Ravazzoli, E., Dalla Torre, C., Da Re, R., Marini Govigli, V., Secco, L., Górriz-Mifsud, E.,
Pisani, E., Barlagne, C., Baselice, A., Bengoumi, M. and Dijskhoorn-Dekker, M., 2021. Can
social innovation make a change in European and Mediterranean marginalized areas? Social
innovation impact assessment in agriculture, fisheries, forestry, and rural
development. Sustainability, 13(4), p.1823.