Co-designing technical innovations in the context of agroecological living landscapes

Simple item page
cg.authorship.typesNot CGIAR developing country instituteen_US
cg.authorship.typesNot CGIAR international instituteen_US
cg.authorship.typesCGIAR multi-centreen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationInternational Center for Tropical Agricultureen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationInternational Water Management Instituteen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationJames Cook Universityen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationCIRADen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationInternational Institute for Tropical Agricultureen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationICARDAen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationCIMMYTen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationProfessional Assistance for Development Actionen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationISRA-BAMEen_US
cg.contributor.affiliationNational Institute of Agronomic Research of Tunisiaen_US
cg.contributor.initiativeAgroecologyen_US
cg.coverage.countryBurkina Fasoen_US
cg.coverage.countryIndiaen_US
cg.coverage.countryKenyaen_US
cg.coverage.countryLao People's Democratic Republicen_US
cg.coverage.countryPeruen_US
cg.coverage.countrySenegalen_US
cg.coverage.countryTunisiaen_US
cg.coverage.countryZimbabween_US
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2BFen_US
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2INen_US
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2KEen_US
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2LAen_US
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2PEen_US
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2SNen_US
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2TNen_US
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2ZWen_US
cg.coverage.regionAfricaen_US
cg.coverage.regionAsiaen_US
cg.coverage.regionAmericasen_US
cg.coverage.regionEastern Africaen_US
cg.coverage.regionWestern Africaen_US
cg.coverage.regionNorthern Africaen_US
cg.coverage.regionSub-Saharan Africaen_US
cg.coverage.regionSouth-eastern Asiaen_US
cg.coverage.regionSouthern Asiaen_US
cg.coverage.regionSouth Americaen_US
cg.coverage.regionLatin America and the Caribbeanen_US
cg.creator.identifierBernard Triomphe: 0000-0001-6657-3002en_US
cg.creator.identifierVimbayi Grace Petrova Chimonyo: 0000-0001-9912-9848en_US
cg.creator.identifierUdo Rudiger: 0000-0003-0202-7461en_US
cg.creator.identifierMaria Claudia Tristán Febres: 0000-0002-3378-154Xen_US
cg.creator.identifierFredy Alexander Monserrate Rojas: 0000-0003-4669-9614en_US
cg.creator.identifierPeter BOLO: 0000-0002-4202-7557en_US
cg.creator.identifierHEZEKIAH KORIR: 0000-0001-5444-2662en_US
cg.creator.identifierEric VALL: 0000-0001-8231-3083en_US
cg.creator.identifierOllo Sib: 0000-0001-6382-6692en_US
cg.creator.identifierJose Sanchez-Choy: 0000-0003-3376-590Xen_US
cg.creator.identifierLisa Elena Fuchs: 0000-0002-8342-6087en_US
cg.creator.identifierKumar, Gopal: 0000-0003-3036-1619en_US
cg.creator.identifierFrédéric Baudron: 0000-0002-5648-2083en_US
cg.subject.actionAreaSystems Transformationen_US
cg.subject.alliancebiovciatAGRICULTUREen_US
cg.subject.alliancebiovciatFOOD SYSTEMSen_US
cg.subject.alliancebiovciatPARTICIPATORY RESEARCHen_US
cg.subject.impactAreaEnvironmental health and biodiversityen_US
dc.contributor.authorTriomphe, Bernarden_US
dc.contributor.authorOuattara, Songdah Désiréen_US
dc.contributor.authorKumar, Gopalen_US
dc.contributor.authorFuchs, Lisa E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSanchez Choy, Joseen_US
dc.contributor.authorPiraux, Marcen_US
dc.contributor.authorMannai, Amalen_US
dc.contributor.authorTelma, Sibandaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSib, Olloen_US
dc.contributor.authorSmith, B.en_US
dc.contributor.authorVall, Ericen_US
dc.contributor.authorMaliappan, Sudharsanen_US
dc.contributor.authorGaderwar, Pragyaen_US
dc.contributor.authorKorir, Hezekiahen_US
dc.contributor.authorBolo, Peteren_US
dc.contributor.authorDouangsavanh, S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDubois, Marcen_US
dc.contributor.authorMonserrate, Fredyen_US
dc.contributor.authorTristan Febres, Mariaen_US
dc.contributor.authorKaoukou, Patriceen_US
dc.contributor.authorRüdiger, Udoen_US
dc.contributor.authorMhamed, Hatem Cheikhen_US
dc.contributor.authorChimonyo, Vimbayien_US
dc.contributor.authorBaudron, Frédéricen_US
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-31T12:32:52Zen_US
dc.date.available2025-01-31T12:32:52Zen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/172653en_US
dc.titleCo-designing technical innovations in the context of agroecological living landscapesen_US
dcterms.abstractThis report documents the processes, results, and key learnings from implementing co-design approaches for agroecological innovations across eight countries (Burkina Faso, India, Kenya, Laos, Peru, Senegal, Tunisia, and Zimbabwe) during 2023-2024, as part of Work Package 1 of the CGIAR Agroecology Initiative. The participating countries demonstrated significant diversity in their co-design approaches, reflecting different contexts, farming systems, and priorities. Several countries like Kenya and Zimbabwe implemented structured, multi-cycle processes with systematic stakeholder engagement, while others like Peru focused on specific value chains such as organic cacao production. The co-design process typically progressed through several key phases: preparatory work to establish foundations and relationships, stakeholder engagement and visioning to develop shared understanding and goals, collaborative technology identification and design, systematic trial establishment, robust monitoring and evaluation, knowledge exchange through field days and farmer-to-farmer learning, capacity building, and iterative refinement based on results and feedback. Stakeholder participation varied across countries but consistently involved farmers, international researchers, and extension services. Some countries achieved strong integration with national research organizations and private sector actors, though this remained a challenge in several locations. The process helped strengthen institutional collaboration and knowledge sharing between stakeholders while empowering farmers as active participants in innovation development. In Kenya, for example, the establishment of partnerships with farmer training centers as "host centers" created effective platforms for ongoing engagement and scaling. Across the initiative, countries tested approximately 30+ distinct technologies spanning various domains. These included innovations in soil health management, such as Zimbabwe's conservation agriculture practices and Tunisia's biochar applications; integrated pest management approaches like Kenya's plant-based biopesticides and Peru's organic disease management for cacao; water management technologies including India's solar irrigation systems; and crop-livestock integration methods demonstrated by Burkina Faso's dairy production innovations. The scale of implementation was significant, reaching 300-350 farmers (data from six countries only), though the intensity of engagement varied. Most countries implemented 1 or 2 experimental cycles during this period, with some achieving three cycles based on local growing seasons. Technology performance and adoption patterns showed strong context-dependency. Several technologies demonstrated significant potential for scaling, particularly where they aligned well with existing farming systems and provided clear economic benefits. Tunisia's forage intercropping systems showed marked improvements in soil health and animal nutrition, while Kenya's basic agroecological practices achieved widespread adoption through existing farmer networks. Burkina Faso's dairy management innovations demonstrated how integrated approaches could improve both productivity and resource efficiency. Several critical success factors for technology adoption were identified, including secure land tenure, access to adequate labor and resources, and strong institutional support systems. Common challenges included high initial investment costs, intensive labor requirements, and the need for technical knowledge and training. Gender dynamics played a significant role, with some technologies showing different adoption patterns between men and women farmers. Looking forward, the co-design experience generated valuable insights for future implementation. There is a clear need for standardized yet flexible methodological guidelines that maintain scientific rigor while allowing local adaptation. Future processes should better integrate activities across plot, farm, and landscape scales, while addressing multiple types of innovations including organizational and institutional ones. Enhanced mechanisms for inclusive participation, particularly of women farmers and diverse stakeholder groups, will be crucial for success. These results provide a strong foundation for refining and scaling these approaches through the upcoming Multifunctional Landscapes program. The experiences demonstrate that well-structured co-design approaches can generate both immediate benefits and longer-term transformative change in agricultural systems, particularly when supported by robust knowledge sharing platforms and communication systems. Success will require continued attention to both technical and social dimensions while maintaining flexibility to accommodate local contexts and emerging opportunities.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsOpen Accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationTriomphe, B.; Ouattara, S.D.; Kumar, G.; Fuchs, L.E.; Sanchez Choy, J.; Piraux, M.; Mannai, A.; Telma, S.; Smith, B.; Sib, O.; Vall, E.; Maliappan, S.; Gaderwar, P.; Korir, H.; Bolo, P.; Douangsavanh, S.; Dubois, M.; Monserrate, F.; Tristan Febres, M.; Kaoukou, P.; Rüdiger, U.; Mhamed, H.C.; Chimonyo, V.; Baudron, F. (2024) Co-designing technical innovations in the context of agroecological living landscapes. 94 p.en_US
dcterms.issued2024-12en_US
dcterms.languageenen_US
dcterms.licenseCC-BY-SA-4.0en_US
dcterms.subjectinnovation adoptionen_US
dcterms.subjectagroecologyen_US
dcterms.subjectassessmenten_US
dcterms.subjectlandscapeen_US
dcterms.typeReporten_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
report.pdf
Size:
3.7 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

Alliance Bioversity CIAT Reports
Alliance Research Lever 2: Multifunctional Landscapes
CGIAR Initiative on Agroecology