Katherine A. Snyder

An analysis of power dynamics within innovation platforms for natural resource management

Innovation systems thinking is increasingly influencing approaches to sustainable agricultural development in developing world contexts. This represents a shift away from technology transfer towards recognition that agricultural change entails complex interactions among multiple actors and a range of technical, social and institutional factors. One option for practically applying innovation systems thinking involves the establishment of innovation platforms (IPs). Such platforms are designed to bring together a variety of different stakeholders to exchange knowledge and resources and take action to solve common problems. Yet relatively little is known about how IPs operate in practice, particularly how power dynamics influence platform processes. This paper focuses on a research-for-development project in the Ethiopian highlands which established three IPs for improved natural resource management. The ‘power cube’ is used to retrospectively analyse the spaces, forms and levels of power within these platforms and the impact on platform processes and resulting interventions. The overall aim is to highlight the importance of power issues in order to better assess the strengths and limitations of IPs as a model for inclusive innovation. Findings suggest that while IPs may achieve some short-term success in creating spaces for wider participation in decision-making processes, they may be significantly influenced by forms of power which may not always be visible or easily challenged.

Tourism in Maasai communities: a chance to improve livelihoods?

This paper examines community-based tourism among Maasai communities in Tanzania in the context of national policies that have increasingly devolved control over natural resources to local communities. It focuses on economic revenues generated from tourism growth, their distribution to village communities and the constraints and conflicts resulting from attempts to control or access resources. Specific cases illustrate the political and economic complexity of devolved resource management and increased income generation at the community level. Ecotourism and community-based tourism are frequently claimed to be possible remedies for wildlife and natural resources conservation, but research indicates that implementation and revenue-sharing are far from straightforward. The paper uses case studies from communities in northern Tanzania, in Ngorongoro District (Loliondo and Lake Natron), Simanjiro District and Longido District (West Kilimanjaro) to explore issues between pastoralism, cultivation, hunting tourism, photographic tourism, conservation and governance systems. It discusses the implementation of the 1998 National Forestry and Wildlife Policies, the creation of Wildlife Management Areas and the 1999 Land Act and Village Land Act. Data and experiences were gathered over a three-year period working with the Sand County Foundation – Tanzania from 2006 to 2008. The paper contributes to the assessment and discussion of pro-poor tourism and poverty alleviation concepts.

The yield gap: closing the gap by widening the approach

The yield gap has arisen again as a focus for agricultural research to ensure food security and economic growth for farmers around the world. To examine this renewed interest, we carried out a review of key literature in the field of yield gap analysis to identify important gaps in research and analysis. In so doing, both the complexities in yield gap studies emerged along with some significant omissions. Much of the literature and research on the yield gap has been framed by larger concerns and initiatives to raise agricultural productivity. This focus has led to an emphasis on technical solutions such as crop breeding, fertilizer application and other methods to increase production. However, this concentration on the technical usually ignores the wider social, economic and political context that shapes farmer decision-making about agricultural production. This context can either discourage or enable farmers to close their yield gap. Additionally, the impact of increased agricultural production through certain technical solutions also often overlooks the wider impact on the landscape and the ecosystem services which underpin agricultural production and livelihoods. We argue that increasing agricultural productivity, and closing the yield gap, must be addressed with this broader approach.