Perspectives on innovation adoption (Poultry)
Samuel ‘Niyi Adediran (PhD), Coordinator TAAT Livestock Compact, ILRI
TAAT Small Ruminants Value Chain Inception Meeting, ILRI Addis, 22 June 2018

Overview
Diverse Innovations in Livestock value chains
Innovation adoption Theory
Approaches to adoption
Conclusions

Diverse Livestock Technologies
Alternative protein sources – Moringa, Urea treated
Feed conservation – Hay, Silage
Concentrates
Combo vaccines & health products (PPR-SGP, ND-Fowl pox etc.
Thermo-tolerant vaccines
Maize for food and feed
Energy Biogas

Innovation adoption pathways
• Diffusion Process Beal et al. (1957)
• Crossing the Chasm G. Moore (1991)
• Normalisation Process theory (Medical
sociology) Carl May.

Adoptable Innovations
Some attributes of easily adoptable
Technologies
 Affordable
 Decomposable
 Provides added value
 Directly usable by adopters
 Experimental

Approaches to stimulate livestock innovations

Livestock innovations - Physiology
• Improve genetics – Breeding,
inclusive approach, etc.
• Nutrition - fodder and animals for
drought resilience.
• Animal health - Thermo-tolerant &
Combo vaccines

Livestock innovations – production Systems
• Responsible Intensification.
• Synergies across value chains – fodder seeds, fertilizer,
nutrition, management-Housing, product processing,
packaging and techniques.
• Access to credits and markets.
• Youths and Entrepreneurship

Innovation through institutions
• Enabling policy environment
• Public private partnerships
• Leverage technologies (ICT)
• Promote Innovation platforms.

Conclusion: Innovation adoption
stimulants
 Leveraging resource use among partner
institutions
 Active Public Private Partnership
 Improve market and credit access for value
addition
 Improve Policy environment.
 More $$$$$ in farmers pockets

This work is financed by
(AfDB.
It is implemented in a partnership with
It contributes to the CGIAR Research Program on
Impact at Scale
Acknowledgements

Partnerships that works
A Partnership is likely to be ineffective if…
 Partners do not share the same values and interests. This can make
agreements on partnership goals difficult.
 There is no sharing of risk, responsibility, accountability or benefits.
 The inequalities in partners’ resources and expertise determine their relative
influence in the partnership’s decision making.
 One person or partner has all the power and/or drives the process.
 There is a hidden motivation which is not declared to all partners.
 The partnership was established just to “keep up appearances’’.
 Partnership members do not have the training to identify issues or resolve
internal conflicts.
 Partners are not chosen carefully, particularly if it is difficult to “de-partner”.
www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/forum/partnerships

CRP and CG logos

This presentation is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence.
better lives through livestock
ilri.org
ILRI thanks all donors and organizations who globally supported its work through their contributions
to the CGIAR system