Marc Schut

Room for the River: Room for Research? The case of depoldering De Noordwaard, the Netherlands

This paper explores the role of research in the context of the Dutch spatial planning procedure ‘Room for the River’. We start from the idea that research is strategically used to create space in negotiation processes, where stakeholders often have competing claims on natural resources. Multiple data collection techniques allow us to reconstruct and understand the critical events that led to the decision to depolder De Noordwaard. Within each critical event we describe and analyse how research and other resources were mobilized by policy-makers and other stakeholders to open up or close down negotiation space. By doing so, this paper contributes insights into the factors that influence the effective mobilization and contribution of research towards exploring sustainable solutions to complex environmental problems. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Ex Ante Scale Dynamics Analysis in the Policy Debate on Sustainable Biofuels in Mozambique

In this paper, we explore how ex ante scale dynamics analysis can contribute to better understanding of interactions between scales and levels, and how these interactions influence solution space in policy processes. In so doing, we address opportunities and challenges of conducting ex ante scale dynamics analysis as part of an action-oriented social science research approach that seeks to enhance its contribution to more scale-sensitive policy development. The policy debate on sustainable biofuels in Mozambique provides the empirical context in which we analyze interactions across administrative, institutional, and economic scales and levels, and how these interactions influence the space in which policy solutions can be explored and designed. On the basis of the analysis, we conclude that ex ante scale dynamics analysis can contribute to: (1) increasing awareness of interactions between scales and levels, and their implications for policy, (2) identifying immediate and potential matches and mismatches between scales and levels, and developing (adaptive) capacity to address them, and (3) identifying stakeholders and their scale- and level-related interests that can provide the basis for collaborative multi-stakeholder learning. Consequently, ex ante scale dynamics analysis can provide an important contribution to balancing and harmonizing interactions across different scales and levels, from which innovative and scale-sensitive policy responses can emerge. As part of an action-oriented, social science research approach, careful attention needs to be paid to processes of scale and level inclusion and exclusion when conducting scale dynamics analysis.

Knowledge and innovation management in the policy debate on biofuel sustainability in Mozambique: what roles for researchers?

This paper explores the relationship between knowledge management (KM) and innovation management (IM) in policy processes. By describing and analysing the roles of researchers as knowledge and innovation managers in policy processes we also contribute to the debate on how researchers can enhance their effective contribution to policy processes. Empirical data for the paper were gathered between December 2008 and November 2010. During that period, two of this papers authors conducted participatory action research whilst supporting the Mozambican inter-ministerial Subgroup Sustainability Criteria in developing a sustainability framework for biofuel production in Mozambique. We conclude that KM and IM are mutually reinforcing and inextricably bound: KM can provide the basis for engaging in IM activities or roles, which may -- consequently -- create an enabling environment for more effective KM in policy processes. The active embedding of researchers in policy processes an action-oriented research approach and systematic reflection can enable researchers to continuously determine what (combination of) KM and IM strategies or roles can enhance the actionability of research in, and the quality of the policy process. To do so successfully, a process-based research approach and strategic management of the boundary between research and policy are key.

Systems approaches to innovation in pest management: reflections and lessons learned from an integrated research program on parasitic weeds in rice

This paper provides a retrospective look at a systems-oriented research program, on the increasing occurrence of parasitic weeds in rainfed rice in sub-Saharan Africa, to qualitatively assess merits and identify challenges of such approach. We gained a broad contextual overview of the problem and different stakeholders roles, which enabled identification of entry points for innovations in parasitic weed management. At the crop level parasitic weed infestation is associated with poor soil fertility and water management. Farmers infrequent use of inputs to control them was caused by various factors, ranging from fears of undesired side effects (agronomic) to a lack of quality control of products (institutional). Furthermore, there may be enough extension agents, but they lack the required training on (parasitic) weed management to provide farmers with advice, while their organizations do not provide them with the necessary means for farm visits. At even higher organizational levels we observed a lack of coherent policies on parasitic weed control and implementation of them. Merits and challenges of an integrated multi-stakeholder and multi-level research project are discussed.

Reflexivity in action research: two spatial planning cases

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss reflexivity in action research, because a lot of action researchers do not pay attention to reflexivity and we find it crucial not only for understanding the position of an action researcher, but also for understanding the process and results of action research. Reflexivity refers to the capability of a researcher to detach from the scientific disciplinary paradigm of his/her discipline and take a different perspective. We start by describing two concepts necessary to understand reflexivity: performativity and self-referentiality. Performativity refers to the way that actors redirect and reconstruct their activities to fit a theoretical model. Self-reference can be defined as the process of reasoning, in which new information in communication is reframed by means of predefined concepts. Two studied cases, Noordwaard and Wieringerrandmeer, demonstrate how citizens mobilise research and researchers to strengthen their negotiating position, because they were marginalised. The action researchers primarily provided action-oriented knowledge, but from their perspective raised very interesting scientific questions about democracy and science. Concerning democracy the issue was raised as to whether planning procedures contradict the inclusiveness that is required to respect the intentions and knowledge that ground alternative plans. At a more scientific principal level the question can be posed if action research can be free of normative positions towards the issue of developments that are preferred or considered inappropriate. The danger of an action researcher who limits his focus to the performance of his knowledge contribution and therefore contributes to self-referentiality can be opposed by reflexivity. We consider it a mission impossible if both positions are equally balanced by one researcher. A first level of reflexivity can be organised by a second action researcher if he/she at least includes a similar theoretical framework. Reflexivity based on a competing theoretical framework should be organised in a secondary analysis.

Effects of multi-stakeholder platforms on multi-stakeholder innovation networks: Implications for research for development interventions targeting innovations at scale

Multi-stakeholder platforms (MSPs) have been playing an increasing role in interventions aiming to generate and scale innovations in agricultural systems. However, the contribution of MSPs in achieving innovations and scaling has been varied, and many factors have been reported to be important for their performance. This paper aims to provide evidence on the contribution of MSPs to innovation and scaling by focusing on three developing country cases in Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Rwanda. Through social network analysis and logistic models, the paper studies the changes in the characteristics of multi-stakeholder innovation networks targeted by MSPs and identifies factors that play significant roles in triggering these changes. The results demonstrate that MSPs do not necessarily expand and decentralize innovation networks but can lead to contraction and centralization in the initial years of implementation. They show that some of the intended next users of interventions with MSPs–local-level actors–left the innovation networks, whereas the lead organization controlling resource allocation in the MSPs substantially increased its centrality. They also indicate that not all the factors of change in innovation networks are country specific. Initial conditions of innovation networks and funding provided by the MSPs are common factors explaining changes in innovation networks across countries and across different network functions. The study argues that investigating multi-stakeholder innovation network characteristics targeted by the MSP using a network approach in early implementation can contribute to better performance in generating and scaling innovations, and that funding can be an effective implementation tool in developing country contexts.

Opportunities and pitfalls for researchers to contribute to the design of evidence-based agricultural policies: lessons from Uganda

ABSTRACT Agricultural policies in sub-Saharan Africa have paid insufficient attention to sustainable intensification. In Uganda, agricultural productivity has stagnated with aggregate increases in crop production being attributed to expansion of cultivated land area. To enhance sustainable crop intensification, the Ugandan Government collaborated with stakeholders to develop agricultural policies using an evidence-based approach. Previously, evidence-based decision-making tended to focus on the evidence base rather than evidence and its interactions within the broader policy context. We identify opportunities and pitfalls to strengthen science engagement in agricultural policy design by analysing the types of evidence required, and how it was shared and used during policy development. Qualitative tools captured stakeholders perspectives of agricultural policies and their status in the policy cycle. Subsequent multi-level studies identified crop growth constraints and quantified yield gaps which were used to compute the economic analyses of policy options that subsequently contributed to sub-national program planning. The study identified a need to generate relevant evidence within a short time window to influence policy design, power influence by different stakeholders and quality of stakeholder interaction. Opportunities for evidence integration surfaced at random phases of policy development due to researchers’ ’embededness’ within co-management and coordination structures.

INNOVATION PLATFORMS IN AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FOR DEVELOPMENT

Innovation platforms are fast becoming part of the mantra of agricultural research for development projects and programmes. Their basic tenet is that stakeholders depend on one another to achieve agricultural development outcomes, and hence need a space where they can learn, negotiate and coordinate to overcome challenges and capture opportunities through a facilitated innovation process. Although much has been written on how to implement and facilitate innovation platforms efficiently, few studies support ex-ante appraisal of when and for what purpose innovation platforms provide an appropriate mechanism for achieving development outcomes, and what kinds of human and financial resource investments and enabling environments are required. Without these insights, innovation platforms run the risk of being promoted as a panacea for all problems in the agricultural sector. This study makes clear that not all constraints will require innovation platforms and, if there is a simpler and cheaper alternative, that should be considered first. Based on the review of critical design principles and plausible outcomes of innovation platforms, this study provides a decision support tool for research, development and funding agencies that can enhance more critical thinking about the purposes and conditions under which innovation platforms can contribute to achieving agricultural development outcomes.