IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/afjrde/280136.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Facteurs influençant la mise en oeuvre des plateformes d’innovation: Cas des plateformes de légumes feuilles traditionnels au Bénin

Author

Listed:
  • OUIDOH, F.N.
  • BACO, M. N.
  • AKPONIKPE,P. B.I.
  • DJENONTIN, A. J.
  • SOSSA-VIHOTOGBE, C.
  • ADECHIAN, S.A.

Abstract

Les plateformes d’innovation (PI) sont perçues aujourd’hui comme les approches les plus adéquates de développement et de promotion des innovations agricoles. Mais la plupart des précédentes études se sont focalisées à la description des résultats obtenus sans approfondir les facteurs sous-tendant ces résultats. La présente étude vise à analyser les facteurs influençant le fonctionnement des PI, en se basant sur le cas de l’intervention du projet ‘’Fertilizer Micro-Dosing and Indigenous Vegetable Production and Utilization (Micro-Veg)’’faisant la promotion des Légumes Feuilles Traditionnels (LFT) et leur mise à l’échelle au Bénin. Deux études de cas de PI ont été présentées suivant un cadre analytique combinant les méthodes des systèmes d’innovations et de l’analyse des fonctions. Ces études de cas concernent les villages de Wooré (commune de Parakou) et de Kouwentakouengou (commune de Boukombé) bénéficiaires des PI installées par le projet. Les données sont collectées lors des entretiens structurés, semi-structurés, des observations participantes, des témoignages, etc. Les données collectées sont relatives à chaque étape des processus de mise en oeuvre et concernent les acteurs (types d’acteurs, profil des acteurs, relations développées, rôles, attitudes, pratiques, perceptions etc), les différentes activités réalisées (entrepreneuriales, apprentissage, diffusion des innovations, investissements marchés développés, mobilisation des ressources humaines, financières matériels, lobbying des groupes d’intérêts), les difficultés rencontrées et approches de solutions. La méthode d’analyse est essentiellement qualitative. Les résultats ont montré que l’existence de marchés et la proximité des acteurs ont facilité la mise en oeuvre des PI. Par contre, la faible diversité des acteurs dans les PI, l’absence du facilitateur et la faible capacité des membres à apporter les solutions aux problèmes identifiés ont limité leur fonctionnement. Aussi, il est recommandé pour la mise à échelle des innovations que les initiatives des PI prennent en compte ces facteurs pour assurer l’efficacité de sa mise en oeuvre.

Suggested Citation

  • Ouidoh, F.N. & Baco, M. N. & Akponikpe,P. B.I. & Djenontin, A. J. & Sossa-Vihotogbe, C. & Adechian, S.A., 2018. "Facteurs influençant la mise en oeuvre des plateformes d’innovation: Cas des plateformes de légumes feuilles traditionnels au Bénin," African Journal of Rural Development (AFJRD), AFrican Journal of Rural Development (AFJRD), vol. 3(1), March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:afjrde:280136
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.280136
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/280136/files/9.Fructueuse.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.280136?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hall, Andy, 2006. "Public private sector partnerships in an agricultural system of innovation: concepts and challenges," MERIT Working Papers 2006-002, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Haki Pamuk & Erwin Bulte & Adewale Adekunle & Aliou Diagne, 2015. "Editor's choice Decentralised innovation systems and poverty reduction: experimental evidence from Central Africa," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 42(1), pages 99-127.
    3. Hounkonnou, Dominique & Kossou, Dansou & Kuyper, Thomas W. & Leeuwis, Cees & Nederlof, E. Suzanne & Röling, Niels & Sakyi-Dawson, Owuraku & Traoré, Mamoudou & van Huis, Arnold, 2012. "An innovation systems approach to institutional change: Smallholder development in West Africa," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 74-83.
    4. Birner, Regina & Davis, Kristin & Pender, John & Nkonya, Ephraim & Anandajayasekeram, Pooniah & Ekboir, Javier M. & Mbabu, Adiel N. & Spielman, David J. & Horna, Daniela & Benin, Samuel & Kisamba-Muge, 2006. "From "best practice" to "best fit": a framework for designing and analyzing pluralistic agricultural advisory services," Research briefs 4, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Negro, Simona O. & Hekkert, Marko P. & Smits, Ruud E., 2007. "Explaining the failure of the Dutch innovation system for biomass digestion--A functional analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 925-938, February.
    6. Hall, Andrew & Rasheed Sulaiman, V. & Clark, Norman & Yoganand, B., 2003. "From measuring impact to learning institutional lessons: an innovation systems perspective on improving the management of international agricultural research," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 213-241, November.
    7. Pamuk, Haki & Bulte, Erwin & Adekunle, Adewale A., 2014. "Do decentralized innovation systems promote agricultural technology adoption? Experimental evidence from Africa," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 227-236.
    8. Bekele Shiferaw & Julius Okello & Ratna Reddy, 2009. "Adoption and adaptation of natural resource management innovations in smallholder agriculture: reflections on key lessons and best practices," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 601-619, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wuepper, David & Sauer, Johannes & Kleemann, Linda, 2014. "Sustainable intensification of pineapple farming in Ghana: Training and complexity," Kiel Working Papers 1973, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    2. Maru, Yiheyis & Sparrow, Ashley & Stirzaker, Richard & Davies, Jocelyn, 2018. "Integrated agricultural research for development (IAR4D) from a theory of change perspective," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 310-320.
    3. Anett Kuntosch & Bettina König, 2018. "Linking system perspectives with user perspectives to identify adoption barriers to food security innovations for smallholder farmers – evidence from rural Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(4), pages 881-896, August.
    4. Dieuwke Lamers & Marc Schut & Laurens Klerkx & Piet van Asten, 2017. "Compositional dynamics of multilevel innovation platforms in agricultural research for development," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(6), pages 739-752.
    5. Klerkx, Laurens & Aarts, Noelle & Leeuwis, Cees, 2010. "Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 390-400, July.
    6. Hall, Andy & Dijkman, Jeroen & Sulaiman, Rasheed, 2010. "Research Into Use: Investigating the Relationship between Agricultural Research and Innovation," MERIT Working Papers 2010-044, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    7. Laurens Klerkx & Andy Hall & Cees Leeuwis, 2009. "Strengthening agricultural innovation capacity: are innovation brokers the answer?," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(5/6), pages 409-438.
    8. Yang, Huan & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2014. "Functions and limitations of farmer cooperatives as innovation intermediaries: Findings from China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 115-125.
    9. Vamsidhar Reddy, T.S. & Hall, Andy & Sulaiman V., Rasheed, 2010. "New Organisational and Institutional Vehicles for Managing Innovation in South Asia: Opportunities for Using Research for Technical Change and Social Gain," MERIT Working Papers 2010-054, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    10. Sparrow, Ashley D. & Traoré, Adama, 2018. "Limits to the applicability of the innovation platform approach for agricultural development in West Africa: Socio-economic factors constrain stakeholder engagement and confidence," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 335-343.
    11. Stür, Werner & Khanh, Truong Tan & Duncan, Alan, 2016. "Transformation of smallholder beef-cattle production in Vietnam," IFPRI book chapters, in: Devaux, André & Torero, Maximo & Donovan, Jason & Horton, Douglas E. (ed.), Innovation for inclusive value-chain development: Successes and challenges, chapter 6, pages 201-228, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. Yigezu A. Yigezu & Zewdie Bishaw & Abdoul Aziz Niane & Jeffrey Alwang & Tamer El-Shater & Mohamed Boughlala & Aden Aw-Hassan & Wuletaw Tadesse & Filippo M. Bassi & Ahmed Amri & Michael Baum, 2021. "Institutional and farm-level challenges limiting the diffusion of new varieties from public and CGIAR centers: The case of wheat in Morocco," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(6), pages 1359-1377, December.
    13. Hounkonnou, Dominique & Brouwers, Jan & van Huis, Arnold & Jiggins, Janice & Kossou, Dansou & Röling, Niels & Sakyi-Dawson, Owuraku & Traoré, Mamoudou, 2018. "Triggering regime change: A comparative analysis of the performance of innovation platforms that attempted to change the institutional context for nine agricultural domains in West Africa," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 296-309.
    14. Ravichandran, Thanammal & Teufel, Nils & Capezzone, Filippo & Birner, Regina & Duncan, Alan J., 2020. "Stimulating smallholder dairy market and livestock feed improvements through local innovation platforms in the Himalayan foothills of India," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    15. Ton, Giel & Klerkx, Laurens & de Grip, Karin & Rau, Marie-Luise, 2015. "Innovation grants to smallholder farmers: Revisiting the key assumptions in the impact pathways," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-23.
    16. Schut, Marc & Klerkx, Laurens & Rodenburg, Jonne & Kayeke, Juma & Hinnou, Léonard C. & Raboanarielina, Cara M. & Adegbola, Patrice Y. & van Ast, Aad & Bastiaans, Lammert, 2015. "RAAIS: Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Innovation Systems (Part I). A diagnostic tool for integrated analysis of complex problems and innovation capacity," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1-11.
    17. Leuveld, Koen & Nillesen, Eleonora & Pieters, Janneke & Ross, Martha & Voors, Maarten & Wang Sonne, Elise, 2018. "Agricultural extension and input subsidies to reduce food insecurity. Evidence from a field experiment in the Congo," MERIT Working Papers 2018-009, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    18. Ragasa, Catherine & Mzungu, Diston & Kaima, Eric & Kazembe, Cynthia & Kalagho, Kenan, 2017. "Capacity and accountability in the Agricultural Extension System in Malawi: Insights from a survey of service providers in 15 districts:," IFPRI discussion papers 1673, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Colleen M. Eidt & Laxmi P. Pant & Gordon M. Hickey, 2020. "Platform, Participation, and Power: How Dominant and Minority Stakeholders Shape Agricultural Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, January.
    20. Dolinska, Aleksandra & d'Aquino, Patrick, 2016. "Farmers as agents in innovation systems. Empowering farmers for innovation through communities of practice," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 122-130.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:afjrde:280136. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://afjrd.org/jos/index.php/afjrd/index .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.