IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i5p2960-d763326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge Networks in Organic Fruit Production across Europe: A Survey Study

Author

Listed:
  • Eligio Malusà

    (The National Institute of Horticultural Research, 96-100 Skierniewice, Poland)

  • Ewa M. Furmanczyk

    (The National Institute of Horticultural Research, 96-100 Skierniewice, Poland)

  • Małgorzata Tartanus

    (The National Institute of Horticultural Research, 96-100 Skierniewice, Poland)

  • Gerjan Brouwer

    (Delphy B.V., 6700 CA Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • Claude-Eric Parveaud

    (Groupe de Recherche en Agriculture Biologique, 84 911 Avignon, France)

  • François Warlop

    (Groupe de Recherche en Agriculture Biologique, 84 911 Avignon, France)

  • Markus Kelderer

    (Centro di Sperimentazione Laimburg, 39040 Auer, Italy)

  • Jutta Kienzle

    (Fordergemeinschaft Okologischer Obstbau EV, 74189 Weinsberg, Germany)

  • Evelyne Alcazar Marin

    (Asociación ECOVALIA, 41013 Sevilla, Spain)

  • Teun Dekker

    (Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet, 750 07 Upssala, Sweden)

  • Radek Vávra

    (Vyzkumny a Slechtitelsky Ustav Ovocnarsky Holovousy s.r.o., 508 01 Holovousy, Czech Republic)

  • Vincenzo Verrastro

    (Centro Internazionale di Alti Studi Agronomici Mediterranei, 70010 Valenzano, Italy)

  • Hanne Lindhard Pedersen

    (HortiAdvice, 5250 Odense, Denmark)

  • Clémence Boutry

    (Forschungsinstitut für Biologischen Landbau FiBL, 5070 Frick, Switzerland)

  • Michael Friedli

    (Forschungsinstitut für Biologischen Landbau FiBL, 5070 Frick, Switzerland)

  • Marco Schlüter

    (Naturland—Verband für ökologischen Landbau e.V., 82166 Gräfelfing, Germany)

Abstract

Limited data regarding the resources and methods used by organic fruit growers to learn about production practices are available, even though this information is crucial to improving the efficacy of knowledge transfer. Therefore, a survey to gain information from knowledge networks dealing with organic fruit production about their structural organisation, tasks and methods of communication was carried out in twenty-one countries from Europe and the Mediterranean basin. A total of 56 networks representing about 42,500 professionals were identified as a result of the survey. The vast majority of them were only active at the regional or national level and were composed of farmers, advisors and researchers. About 3/4 of the networks were developing improved strategies for agronomic practices and about half of them were also involved in different knowledge-transfer activities between their members. Personal contact was the most used method to exchange and disseminate information within the networks as well as to elaborate improved strategies. The findings were analysed in view of the methods and practices commonly used to share both explicit (scientific) and implicit (practical) knowledge among practitioners. It was concluded that knowledge networks play an important role in the development of more resilient organic cropping systems, frequently making organic fruit growers the drivers of innovation. Networking for knowledge exchange was considered a process that encourages the active involvement of farmers in experimentation and innovation applying a method of knowledge sharing that is rooted in the very foundation of organic philosophy. Some recommendations and future research were suggested to further foster the development and functioning of networks for knowledge exchange.

Suggested Citation

  • Eligio Malusà & Ewa M. Furmanczyk & Małgorzata Tartanus & Gerjan Brouwer & Claude-Eric Parveaud & François Warlop & Markus Kelderer & Jutta Kienzle & Evelyne Alcazar Marin & Teun Dekker & Radek Vávra , 2022. "Knowledge Networks in Organic Fruit Production across Europe: A Survey Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2960-:d:763326
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2960/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2960/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lohr, Luanne & Park, Timothy A., 2002. "Choice of insect management portfolios by organic farmers: lessons and comparative analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 87-99, November.
    2. 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).
    3. Jasper Eshuis & Marian Stuiver, 2005. "Learning in context through conflict and alignment: Farmers and scientists in search of sustainable agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 22(2), pages 137-148, June.
    4. repec:lib:0000of:v:1:y:2015:i:1:p:36-37 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Labarthe, Pierre & Laurent, Catherine, 2013. "Privatization of agricultural extension services in the EU: Towards a lack of adequate knowledge for small-scale farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 240-252.
    6. Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2008. "Matching demand and supply in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure: Experiences with innovation intermediaries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 260-276, June.
    7. Julia Nerbonne & Ralph Lentz, 2003. "Rooted in grass: Challenging patterns of knowledge exchange as a means of fostering social change in a southeast Minnesota farm community," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 20(1), pages 65-78, March.
    8. Läpple, Doris & Rensburg, Tom Van, 2011. "Adoption of organic farming: Are there differences between early and late adoption?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1406-1414, May.
    9. repec:lib:0000of:v:3:y:2017:i:1:p:20-33 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xudan Lin & Hong Zhu & Duo Yin, 2022. "Enhancing Rural Resilience in a Tea Town of China: Exploring Tea Farmers’ Knowledge Production for Tea Planting, Tea Processing and Tea Tasting," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.

    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. Aurélie Cardona & Cristiana Carusi & Michael Mayerfeld Bell, 2021. "Engaged Intermediaries to Bridge the Gap between Scientists, Educational Practitioners and Farmers to Develop Sustainable Agri-Food Innovation Systems: A US Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-13, October.
    2. 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.
    3. Alex Koutsouris, 2012. "Exploring the emerging facilitation and brokerage roles for agricultural extension education," Working Papers 2012-4, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    4. Hermans, Frans & Stuiver, Marian & Beers, P.J. & Kok, Kasper, 2013. "The distribution of roles and functions for upscaling and outscaling innovations in agricultural innovation systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 117-128.
    5. Abbasi Fatemeh & Esparcia Javier & Saadi Heshmat A., 2019. "From Analysis to Formulation of Strategies for Farm Advisory Services (Case Study: Valencia – Spain). an Application through Swot and Qspm Matrix," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 43-73, March.
    6. Xiangping Jia, 2021. "Agro-Food Innovation and Sustainability Transition: A Conceptual Synthesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, June.
    7. Faure, Guy & Davis, Kristin E. & Ragasa, Catherine & Franzel, Steven & Babu, Suresh Chandra, 2016. "Framework to assess performance and impact of pluralistic agricultural extension systems: The best-fit framework revisited:," IFPRI discussion papers 1567, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Nettle, R. & Morton, J.M. & McDonald, N. & Suryana, M. & Birch, D. & Nyengo, K. & Mbuli, M. & Ayre, M. & King, B. & Paschen, J.-A. & Reichelt, N., 2021. "Factors associated with farmers’ use of fee-for-service advisors in a privatized agricultural extension system," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    9. Dhiab, H. & Labarthe, P. & Laurent, C., 2020. "How the performance rationales of organisations providing farm advice explain persistent difficulties in addressing societal goals in agriculture," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    10. Koutsouris, Alex, 2012. "Facilitating Agricultural Innovation Systems: A critical realist approach," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 114(2), pages 1-7, October.
    11. Brown, Philip & Roper, Simon, 2017. "Innovation and networks in New Zealand farming," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 61(3), July.
    12. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    13. Cuong Le Van & Nguyen To The, 2019. "Farmers’ adoption of organic production," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 33-59, February.
    14. Cameira, Maria do Rosário & Rodrigo, Isabel & Garção, Andreia & Neves, Manuela & Ferreira, Antónia & Paredes, Paula, 2024. "Linking participatory approach and rapid appraisal methods to select potential innovations in collective irrigation systems," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 299(C).
    15. Michael J. Motta, 2021. "Diffusion and Typology: The Invention and Early Adoption of Medicinal Marijuana and Offshore Wind Policies," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 567-584, January.
    16. Sergio Ochoa Jiménez & Gimena Vianey Cervantes Hurtado & Carlos Armando Jacobo Hernández & José Guadalupe Flores López, 2020. "Knowledge and Innovation in Mexican Agricultural Organizations," Economies, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-12, November.
    17. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    18. Čikić, Jovana & Petrović, Živojin, 2013. "Diffusion Of Knowledge And Innovations In Serbian Agriculture," Agri-Food Sector in Serbia: State and Challenges, Serbian Association of Agricultural Economists, number 157553 edited by Škorić, Dragan & Tomić, Danilo & Popović, Vesna, December.
    19. Fieldsend, Andrew & Székely, Erika, 2013. "An assessment of the agricultural knowledge and innovation system in Hungary," Rural Areas and Development, European Rural Development Network (ERDN), vol. 10, pages 1-18.
    20. Pedzisa, Tarisayi & Rugube, Lovemore & Winter-Nelson, Alex & Baylis, Kathy & Mazvimavi, Kizito, 2016. "The Intensity of adoption of Conservation agriculture by smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 54(3), January.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2960-:d:763326. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.