Book of Abstract (incl. addendum) - IFSA symposium 2012

Workshop 2.3 Systems thinking and practice in rural innovation: advances in concept,
methodologies and interventions
Communities of practice as an analytical approach to understanding
decision making on multifunctional aspects on Danish dairy farms
Mads Lægdsgaard Madsen and Egon Noe
Aarhus University, Denmark
Madsl.Madsen@agrsci.dk
In Danish dairy farming the use of summer grazing for dairy cows is decreasing in these years. Most
dairy farmers acknowledge that there is a public demand for the multifunctional aspects of grazing but
nevertheless an increasing number of farmers keep the cows stabled all year round. Economic
arguments are often used to justify this decision but most often these arguments are not in accordance
with the economic realities. An earlier study based on the theory of communities of practice has shown
that the work-related micro-level social interaction on the individual farm is pivotal for change in
accordance with public demand for compliance with environmental targets. This might also be the case
for the decision on use of grazing on dairy farms. On the empirical basis of interviews and participant
observations on Danish dairy farms and drawing on the theory of communities of practices as an
analytical framework, this paper analyses the relational preconditions for decision making in the microlevel
social collaboration around the farmer and the work on the farm.
Facilitated Networks and Beyond: Policy instruments for agricultural
innovation
Pieter J. Beers and Floor Geerling-Eiff
Wageningen University, The Netherlands
Pj.Beers@wur.nl
The innovation systems literature emphasises the importance of networks for agricultural innovation.
Networks offer governments new opportunities to stimulate agricultural innovation. As a policy
instrument, a so-called facilitated network often takes the form of a project, the goals of which include
or entail the formation of new networks or the strengthening of existing networks. We report on an
exploratory study comparing the effectiveness of facilitated networks to other policy instruments for
agricultural innovation in the Netherlands.
We conducted semi-structured interviews with ten experts on networks and innovation. Policy
alternatives to networks they named included research funding, innovation experiments, knowledge
vouchers for entrepreneurs, practice networks, competitions for awards / prizes, innovation subsidies
for individual entrepreneurs, legal exceptions, legislation and fiscalisation.
In the early stages of innovation, facilitated networks were seen as more effective and costefficient
than the other instruments. This was especially the case for system transformation. However,
other instruments can have comparable performance for innovation when they result in sufficient
network formation. This can be achieved by implementing those instruments in ways that require the
target groups to build coalitions and other forms of networks. Network formation was evidently seen as
an important factor in the facilitation of innovation. Networks were also seen as effective for system
optimisation, but not more cost-efficient than other effective instruments.
Finally, past policy experiences enable moving beyond the generic term of “(facilitated)
network” to develop more advanced instruments for specific types and phases of innovation. An
example in case would be to combine instruments such as research funding, innovation experiments
and exceptions in legislation to better support invention and business case development for system
transformation.
48