Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Diversity of innovation processes: Experiences from imGoats Mozambique


Published on

Poster prepared by Birgit Boogaard, Kees Swaans, Saskia Hendrickx, Michaela Cosijn, Ramkumar Bendapudi and Hailemichael Taye for the ILRI APM 2013, Addis Ababa, 15-17 May 2013

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Diversity of innovation processes: Experiences from imGoats Mozambique

  1. 1. Points of attention in intervention areasContext; Type of innovation and actors involved; Initiative; Changes;Flexibility; ResultsILRI APM, Addis Ababa, 15-17 May 2013Diversity of innovation processes:Experiences from imGoats MozambiqueThis document is licensed for use under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported Lisence May 2013Developing capacity1. Project partners and stakeholdersneed skills to facilitate innovationprocesses2. Innovation capacity requireseffective linkages betweenproject partners and stakeholders3. Innovation processes ask for jointexperimentation and learningBirgit Boogaard, Kees Swaans, Saskia Hendrickx, Michaela Cosijn, Ramkumar Bendapudi, Hailemichael TayeImGoats project aims to• Increase incomes and food security by enhancing pro-poor small ruminant value chains• Transform goat production and marketing to aprofitable enterprise that taps into a growing market• Increase market opportunities through InnovationPlatforms (IP)Poster objectiveTo reflect on the diversity of innovation processes in threeintervention areas of the imGoats project in MozambiquePartners CARE (Mozambique) BAIF (India) District and provincialveterinary authoritiesInnovation processes• No blueprint to enhance innovation• Recognize diversity of innovations• Adaptation to local and changing conditions• Require high flexibility of actors• Limited documented experiences on dynamicsImproving access to animal health services Context: no animal health services for goatsCARE had experience with training paravets(community animal health worker) for cattle Innovation: technological and organisational(paravets provide animal health services) Initiative: CARE/ILRI at project start Changes: limited - refined existing extensionand training models Flexibility: limited – planned intervention,CARE and ILRI took initiative based onproven model Results: 16 paravets trained, smallholdersuse and pay for servicesDevelopment of communal pasture areas Context: most goats tethered, limited documentedexperiences in Mozambique Innovation: organizational and institutional(collective action between smallholders, communityleaders, paravets and local government;legalisation of areas) Initiative: IP members Changes: unexpected, not planned by CARE/ILRI Flexibility: very high – joint experimentation CAREsupported local government to act on existing landuse strategies Results: Communal pasture areas identified and re-used in 8 communities, but challenges remain (e.g.theft, lack of herders, uncontrolled fires)Improving market access Context: irregular goat sales, no goat marketsCARE had experience with cattle fairs Innovation: organisational and institutional(increased coordination between VC actors,introduction of weighing scale) Initiative: IP members and CARE/ILRI Changes: goat market demand lower thananticipated, buyers reluctant to use scale Flexibility: quite high - CARE and ILRIexperimented with different market modelse.g. local market, private sector, markets atlonger distances Results: 6 goat fairs organized to dateThree strategic lessons on:Unlocking livestock development potential through science, influence and capacity developmentInnovation process: planned, clear,CARE/ILRI led, familiar stakeholders,straightforward activities,predictableInnovation process: partially planned, led by IPmembers with CARE/ILRI, familiar and newstakeholders and activities,rather unpredictableInnovation process: unplanned, led by IP membersand other actors with strong input from CARE/ILRI,new stakeholders and activities,unexpectedConclusion: different innovation processes coexist in the same project context; all are justified and contribute to development outcomes