4. Creating an Enabling Environment for Agricultural Innovation.

4.1. National Innovation Policy

• A national innovation policy is not just an extension of the science and technology
policy.

• It is a higher-level policy integrating science and technology, economic, industrial,

infrastructure, taxation, trade, labor, and education policies (to name the most
relevant)

• it is not limited to one particular ministry or agency.

• It requires substantial coordination and consensus building among ministries as well

as socioeconomic partners such as the business sector, trade unions, and value chain
• The mix of policies for innovation depends on the country’s political
orientation and objectives, and different forms of innovation require
different policy instruments and responses.

• The role of an innovation policy is to create the best possible conditions

for innovation by developing a range of public goods that are essential
for an innovative knowledge economy.

• possible conditions will vary significantly from one country and

sector to another, depending on the development phase, economic
structure, and national priorities.
primary targets of a national innovation policy.

1. organize and implement a national innovation policy (mobilize and

engage actors, provide guidance and explaining the objective.

2. improve the regulatory framework for innovation

3. foster innovation through education

4. facilitate the creation, exchange, and diffusion of knowledge. This is

core business of an innovation system

5. mobilize and allocate resources for innovation activities.

The national innovation policy should:

(1)define which innovation activities require public support;

(2) define the tax base for public funds (general versus specific taxes;

(2) define the type of funding instruments to be used (subsidies, tax

breaks, patents, procurement, and so on); and

(4) prioritize and allocate public resources across the various innovation
activities.
4.2. Governance of Innovation Systems

• Governance concerns the mechanisms by which decisions are

made in an organization, whether public, private, or nonprofit

• Governance has several dimensions, including power, culture,

incentives, leadership, and coordination
Efficient governance depends on certain qualities, including:

■ Legitimacy; policy actors and approaches adopted in policy processes have to be widely
appropriate and accepted for the tasks at hand.

■ Coherence; The different strands of innovation policy and associated policy instruments must
fit together.

■ Stability; Innovation requires sufficiently stable framework conditions, institutions, and policy.

■ Ability to adapt. As the environment for innovation evolves, and innovation evolves along with
it, governance actors need to be able to adapt.

■ Ability to steer and give direction. A related capability is the governance system’s ability to
provide direction to actors and steer the innovation system as a whole.
4.3. Managing Intellectual Property to Foster Agricultural Development

• Unlike in the industrialized world, agricultural research (both basic and

applied) in developing countries is mostly in the public-sector domain.

• Public sector programs cover the entire range of agricultural research,

such as genetic resources, food, feed and fiber crops, livestock, forestry,
fisheries, soil management, integrated pest control, post-harvest
systems, and conservation of natural resources.
• the value of intellectual property in the research and development
(R&D) sector in general, and the agricultural research sector in
particular, has increased considerably

• The issues of IPRs in agriculture are complex, involving a range of

stakeholders with a diverse set of views, bargaining positions, and
vulnerabilities.

• Implementing and managing intellectual property thus presents many

complex decisions for agricultural scientists, research managers and
policy makers
Intellectual Property: What is it and Why it is Important?

• Intellectual property right is a broad term used to cover patents, trade

marks, plant breeders rights, copyright, trade secrets and other types of
rights that the law gives for the protection of investment in creative
effort and knowledge creation.

• owners of intellectual property can recoup their expenditure in

creating new knowledge.
• IPRs are key to the international competitiveness of both nations and
firms.

• Adequate IP protection at an international scale has become essential

for appropriating global revenue streams to support investments

• The application of IPRs in a public research institute poses complex

issues and challenges on both sides of management decisions -- the
protection of their own plant and animal technologies and the use of
IP owned by others.
If protection is to be introduced, they want to know:

• Which type of IP protection will most directly address the perceived needs of
public research?

• What types of IPP are relevant for agricultural research?

• How to estimate the market value of patents, plant variety protection and
other intellectual property for new and potential products so as to make IPR
decisions cost-effective?
• What are the likely benefits and costs of that protection versus those from leaving
research results unprotected?

• How can public research organizations ensure that their inventions become
available for use by the society?

• Would there be any significant gains from using IPR protection as a strategy for
generating new revenues for research?
4.4. Biosafety Regulatory Systems in the Context of Agricultural Innovation

• To date 22 countries have approved genetically engineered (GE) plan

for cultivation or consumption.

• In 2010, 148 million hectares were planted to GE crops, largely

soybeans, cotton, maize, and canola.

• Comon tom all countries GE crops are cultivated is a system to regul

these products where and especially to ensure that they are evaluated
with respect to human health and environmental safety (commonly
referred to as biosafety)
• The regulation of products of agricultural biotechnology, particularly
GE crops, has been identified as a constraint to innovation in this
sector, largely because of the costs of meeting information and data
requirements prescribed by regulatory authorities for assessing the
safety of GE plants.
Risk assessors and agreed approach to risk assessment:

Those involved in risk assessment are usually scientific experts who are
independent from the decision-making process.

• Risk managers and decision makers: Whereas risk assessors are usually
scientists operating in an advisory capacity, eventually a decision has to be made
as to whether the activity with GEOs will be permitted, and if so under what
conditions.

• This puts the burden of responsibility on to government officials.

• Extension services: Extension officers play a vital role in introducing the

4.5. Technical Regulations and Standards

• A “standard” is a document approved by a recognized body that

provides, for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines, or
characteristics for products or related processes and production
methods. Compliance with standards is not mandatory.
• “Technical regulations,” on the other hand, specify product characteristics or their
related processes and production methods, including the applicable administrative
provisions, with which compliance is mandatory.

• Technical regulations include import bans (total or partial), technical

specifications (process and product standards), packaging standards, information
requirements, and requirements for labeling and claims.

• Standards and technical regulations for agriculture and food have become
increasingly important in recent decades.
 CHAPTER FIVE:
Assessing Prioritizing, Monitoring, and Evaluating Agricultural Innovation Systems
5.1. Assessing Innovation for Prioritizing Investments

• The design of agricultural policies and investment programs requires

more than analysis of the agricultural sector and its subsectors; it
requires information on links with other sectors to which agriculture
may contribute or from which agriculture may benefit.

• Priorities are determined through deeper and wider sets of data, often
involving ongoing synthesis through interaction and learning with
many stakeholders.
• Investing in innovation systems for agriculture has become one of the
most important global and national policy efforts

• Three analytical methods are recommended for assessing and

prioritizing investments in agricultural innovation:

(1)understanding the theory of change; the set of hypotheses, as

developed by stakeholders, of how policy and investment priorities,
and the resulting programming and projects, plan to achieve their
intended goals and objectives, including social, economic, political,
and environmental change objectives.
Questions for Assessing the Theory of Change in Innovation Systems

■ What is the definition of innovation in the given context?

■ How do innovations emerge and develop in the given context?

■ Who are the innovation actors (organizations) in the given context?

■ What policies and investments exist to support innovation in the given context?

■ What policies and investments do not exist to support innovation in the given
context?

■ How are innovation trends, processes, and products measured in the given context?

■ What are the key sources of data on innovation in the given context?
 Coun…
• (2) measuring the functions of innovation systems; Decision-making
processes such as ex ante (prior to implementing an investment
intervention) and ex post (after implementing an investment
intervention), the identification of investment priorities, and
organizational performance assessment rely on identifying the key
functions of innovation systems.
Roles of Ex Ante and Ex Post Assessments

Ex ante assessment

– Analyzes the likely impact of a proposed intervention.

– Identifies the optimal portfolio of investments according to specific programs or projects.

– Establishes a baseline or framework to collect and compare information for ex post evaluation.

Ex post assessment

– Assesses impact.

– Supports accountability reporting to investors.

– Justifies allocation of resources.

– Generates lessons.

– Identifies recommendations for future interventions.

Ten Functions of Innovation Systems and Related Data Sources
(3) Benchmarking: making comparisons across innovation systems:

• Benchmarking uses input indicators (investments in the functions of an innovation

system) as well as output/ outcome indicators (products and processes and trends
emerging from an innovation system) to identify disconnects within the system
among institutions and in relation to government policies that hinder innovation.

• At the policy and investment program level, innovation benchmarks and indicators
are used to compare current and historical measures and trends within the same
country or to compare the innovative capacity of actors in the system, particularly
their relative ability to identify and absorb technologies to enhance innovative
performance and overall competitiveness.
5.2. Methods for Organizational Assessments in Agricultural
Innovation Systems

• Investments to improve the overall performance of an AIS often include

components to improve the functioning of individual organizations

• For planning, managing, and evaluating investment projects to support

agricultural innovation,

• it is essential to have diagnostic tools for assessing the organizations

within the system
Assessments can support AIS investment projects in the following ways:

• Diagnostic assessments (ex ante). In the planning phase of development

interventions, assessments can be used

to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the organizations involved in an AIS,

to identify entry points for reforms, and

to assess the feasibility and expected costs and benefits of planned investments.

• Monitoring. During the execution of development interventions, assessments are

needed to monitor changes over time. In particular, assessments can help to reveal
whether organizational reforms are proceeding as intended.
Assessments can support AIS investment projects in the following ways:

• Diagnostic assessments (ex ante). In the planning phase of development

interventions, assessments can be used

• to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the organizations involved in an

AIS,

• to identify entry points for reforms, and

• to assess the feasibility and expected costs and benefits of planned

investments.

• Monitoring. During the execution of development interventions,

• Evaluation and impact assessment. After completing an intervention,
such as a reform of a country’s research organization, assessments are
required to evaluate the effectiveness of the investment, to quantify its
impact, and to derive lessons for future interventions.
Another primary task is to select the standard or reference situation against which an organization’s
performance within the innovation system can be assessed.

The following options may be considered:

■ Benchmarking. One approach is to compare the organizations within the system in a particular country with
those of other countries, typically countries in the same region or countries that are otherwise comparable. If
quantitative indicators are used, this approach is known as “benchmarking.”

■ Changes over time. Another approach (which can be combined with benchmarking) is to compare the
performance of the organization at different points in time and determine whether it improved or deteriorated.

■ Policy goals, organizational objectives, or standards.

A third approach is to compare organizations against goals that have been set by policy makers, by managers of
the respective organization, or by another entity, such as a donor organization or certification or accreditation
agency.
Criteria for selecting assessment methods

Before describing assessment methods in detail, it is useful to consider the criteria that influence the choice of an
appropriate method:

■ The scope of the assessment. Even though the assessment is looking at the performance of an individual organization,
from an innovation systems perspective it is important to take into account specific linkages and coordination
mechanisms.

■ The existing data and knowledge. The data and knowledge about an organization that are available (and accessible)
have a large influence on the choice of the assessment method and the amount of primary data that must be collected .
Organizations in the innovation system for agriculture, such as extension organizations, typically have their own
reporting systems. It is helpful to examine whether the data generated from such reporting systems will be useful for
the assessment.

■ The time and resources available. The choice of an assessment method is also determined by the time and the
resources available for the assessment. Ideally, there should be a match between the purpose of the assessment—for
example, to determine the level of the planned investment—and the time and resources available for ex ante, ongoing,
Elements of the Organizational Performance Assessment

• Agricultural research organizations use resources and inputs (funds,

personnel, equipment, and facilities) to undertake their research
operations in order to produce outputs (agricultural technologies and
services) for the benefit of farmers, agro-industries, and other users.
The outcomes (or consequences) of adopting or applying these outputs
are measured by their effects, positive or negative, on such factors as
production costs, yields, and use of natural resources.
Organizational Performance Assessment
Surveys among the staff of organizations

• They can provide in-depth information about the organization’s capacity and
staff incentives, but they need to be carefully planned, as they require genuine
support from management.

• Moreover, it is important to pre-test the survey instrument with a group of

respondents who reflect the diversity of the AIS.

• This step is important not only to test the suitability of the instrument but also to
build confidence among staff.

• In designing the questionnaire, the trade-off between simplicity and capturing

Sample Question Set for Assessing Human Resource Management(staff)
Performance

• To what extent does the organization maintain and update staff

information (e.g., biodata, publications, projects)?

• To what extent does the organization plan and update its staffing,
recruitment, and training requirements?

• How effectively are staffing, recruitment, and training plans linked to

program and project needs?
• How effective are selection procedures in terms of objectivity and
transparency?
• To what extent is training based on merit and on organization and
program objectives?
• How effective are mechanisms to promote a good working environment
and high staff morale?
• How effective is the performance-evaluation process for research staff?
• How effective is the performance-evaluation process for nonresearch
(management, administrative, and support) staff?
• How effective are reward and sanction processes, to motivating staff?
• How effectively does the organization compete with the private sector
in providing salaries and benefits that attract and retain quality staff?
Farm household surveys

For organizations that deal directly with farmers, such as agricultural extension
organizations, surveys among farmers are essential for an ultimate assessment of
organizational performance.

At the same time, farm household surveys can provide important information about
the performance of the AIS as a whole.

Farm household surveys are the most expensive and time consuming approach to
collecting data about agricultural innovation, but they provide particularly relevant
information, especially if secondary data on farm households that capture aspects of
agricultural innovation are not available.
 Fore sighting Investments in Agricultural
Innovation(assignmet)
• it is important to assess the balance between risk and reward involved
in each decision and to gauge the reliability of the individuals and the
strength and trustworthiness of the institutions on which the plan
depends.

• Individuals, firms, and governments therefore have a common interest

in gaining a more accurate sense of the future, either to improve their
chances of making a successful investment or to reduce the risk of loss.
 Coun…

• Fore sighting is a means of gathering and using information to think

strategically about the future, including the future of agriculture

• Fore sighting assumes that the future is not predetermined or even

predictable but that it will be influenced by choices made today.
FORESIGHTING TOOLS AND APPLICATIONS

• Fore sighting is a strategy for change, rather than a strategic plan,

although it often feeds into a strategic planning process.

• Fore sighting is both a process and a set of tools for managing

and communicating knowledge, setting priorities, coordinating
goals, and encouraging innovation in science and technology.
• It involves an iterative and interactive process of systematically
exploring possible future economic and social dynamics, including
factors such as science, technology, institutions, environment, and
development options.

• The aim is to identify strategic areas of investment that will yield the
greatest economic and/or social benefits (Rutten 2001).
From an innovation systems perspective, organizations pursue
fore sighting exercises to:
• encourage strategic and future-oriented thinking

• support innovation strategies and priority setting

• identify research/investment opportunities

• generate visions and images of the future

• cope with “grand challenges”

• facing the economy, society, and environment; and

• promote public debate and trigger necessary actions.

Selecting the appropriate fore sighting tool; Three key strategic planning tools

• Technology road mapping; identifies key trends in the market and clarifies those
trends and their relation to organizational goals; then technological and managerial
decision-making occur to achieve the preferred future.

• Delphi studies; review significant trends in relevant areas (emerging scientific and
technological opportunities, needs for education and training,) and identify the most
plausible outcomes, plus any associated threats and opportunities.

• Fore sighting and back casting exercises ;identify organizational and institutional
drivers of change and their interactions, clarify “known unknowns,” assess
vulnerability to events, identify possible outcomes, back cast to the present day, and
• Beside from the three major fore sighting tools, complementary
methods of information gathering can be used, depending on timelines
and tasks assigned within the task force or to the foresight expert:

• A horizon scan examines the external environment for potential threats

and opportunities or early signs of disruptive technological change.

• A decision tree is developed by constructing a logical sequence of

pertinent questions, such as “If this plan fails, what are our options?”
• User requirements capture. When a particular group (such as
consultants or a local elite) has all of the relevant information, they may
be able to control the agenda and determine the answers.

• A user requirements capture process helps to forestall elite capture and

information asymmetries. The information base for all users is
developed, displayed, discussed, and modified in an iterative process,
often using graphic-rich software that allows data to be overlaid in
layers (a GIS is one example).
5.3. Monitoring Agricultural Innovation System Interventions

• Monitoring is the effective management of performance by implementers to

achieve desired outcomes and report progress

• In common with all interventions, good practice in agricultural innovation

interventions requires effective performance management accompanied by
reporting arrangements that ensure accountability.

• This monitoring provides information that can feed into adjustments in the
intervention; it also acts as a means of reporting on progress and remaining
accountable to investors.
Overview of Methods for Monitoring AIS Interventions
 5.3. Evaluating Agricultural Innovation System Interventions

• The effectiveness of innovation system interventions lies in their outcomes and

impacts being investigated thoroughly and the resulting lessons applied to future
investments. This process contributes to accountability as well as future
investment performance.

Three critical features of AIS interventions influence how they are evaluated.

1. they focus on strengthening capacity;

2. they use a learning-based process;

3. they require a distinction to be made between impact, shared impacts,

 1. A focus on strengthening capacity:

• An innovation system intervention is an investment to improve how

change and innovation take place.

• Although such an investment is made ultimately to achieve certain

social, economic, or environmental impacts, the immediate outcome is
improved ways of doing things—usually referred to as institutional
change.
2. A learning-based intervention process:

• Improvements in how change and innovation take place will depend

on the specific circumstances of each intervention.

• For this reason, ways of achieving those improvements are hard to

design in advance. Innovation system interventions address this issue
by adopting a learning-based approach, in which the intervention
continuously tests the assumptions on which it is based (its
intervention logic).
3. Distinguishing impact, shared impacts, unexpected impacts, and
unrelated impacts:

• While the immediate outcomes of an intervention—for example, the

establishment of innovation platforms can be evaluated easily, it is
more difficult to attribute impacts to those platforms.

• The causal chain from intervention to impact is often complex, may

take time to mature, and might be geographically removed from the
point of intervention.
• Finally, since complex impact chains can often mask underlying causal processes,
there is the danger that impacts may be attributed to an intervention when in fact
they arose from unrelated events. approaches relied on

(1) technology adoption studies,

(2) investigation of economic surplus generated by research and computation of

rates of return, and

(3) economic studies of the contribution of research to impact.

Principles for evaluation:

■ Situational responsiveness influences the design of the evaluation; involves

matching the design to the needs, constraints, and opportunities of the particular

situation rather than one particular method.

The application of this principle rests on understanding the characteristics of an

intervention or parts of it and determining where the underlying change processes

are simple, complicated, or complex.

■ Seek a stronger learning orientation in impact evaluation. A number of new initiatives

notably the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3IE) but also others have

stressed the need to combine accountability and learning objectives. Learning is important

for identifying what worked or did not work and why, and this information is valuable for

designing future investments.

■ Make assumptions explicit and revisit theories of change. Adopting a greater learning

orientation in evaluation means making assumptions about change processes explicit

when planning interventions and revisiting and testing those assumptions at the time of

evaluation. By exploring the validity of the assumptions, evaluators can learn critical

lessons for designing future interventions.

■ Use counterfactuals in impact evaluation. A stronger learning orientation has
also been accompanied by demands for greater rigor in the quantitative methods
used to measure impacts, as well as for methods that better establish what would
have happened without a particular intervention .

■ Mixed methods. Quantitative methods (to measure impacts) clearly are central to
investigating impacts, but they must be complemented by a range of qualitative
methods (to understand and learn from institutional and process changes) that can
help to understand the context in which the intervention took place and the
process to which the intervention contributed that brought about those impacts.
The end