Background
 CIAT
first began constructing innovation histories at the beginning of 2004. The development of
the innovation history methodology is being supported by the CGIAR’s Institutional
Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative. ILAC can be described as a ‘process of
reflection, reframing and use of lessons learned during the research process that results
in changed behavior and improved performance’ of researchers, leaders, producers, and
other actors involved in agricultural innovation. The innovation history methodology is an
approach for fostering ILAC.
An innovation history is simply a history of a given innovation told in the order in
which the events of its creation and adoption occurred. The writer of the history
identifies these events and responds to questions such as:
- What happened and when did it happen?
- Why?
- Who made it happen?
- How?
- Where?
- What were the results?
- What were the motives?
But this is not all. An innovation history also enables the people involved with the
innovation to consider their own and others’ experiences and thus improve the
performance of their team and organization.
The innovation history methodology is described in an ILAC Brief called
“Innovation Histories: A Useful Learning Method” by Boru Douthwaite and
Jacqueline Ashby. The principal objectives in constructing an innovation history are to:
- Enable those involved to consider their actions, discover how these are linked with the
actions of others, and determine and plan for what each could do to attain better results
in the future.
- Permit external parties to learn, whether by studying a particular case or by comparing
experiences across several cases.
The innovation history methodology comprises seven activities that would help
reconstruct the innovation’s history, focusing on the reasons that both brought about
decisive events in the history and oriented the performance and behavior of the different
actors involved with the innovation.
Key points to note
- Contrary to appearances, the order of the activities comprising this method has no
significance. They are not meant to be developed in linear fashion.
- An innovation history is constructed by a central group composed of a facilitator,
analyst, journalist, and one or more leaders or champions from different organizations
benefiting from the innovation.
The seven activities
- Clarifying the beneficiaries’ expectations and objectives
- Deciding on what the innovation should be
- Constructing the timeline and maps of the innovation network
- Writing the learning history
- Catalyzing change based on the innovation’s history
- Writing a publishable version of the innovation’s history
- Disseminating the findings
Each innovation has its individual history, with its own particular characteristics
that will demand changes and adjustments to the methodology’s application.
So far, CIAT is constructing three histories, each at a different stage of development.
These are described below:
Amplifying participatory approaches: a case study of local agricultural research
committees in Latin America
 In January 2004, the construction of a life history of the CIAL methodology
was begun. CIAL is the acronym for “comités de investigación agrícola local”
or local agricultural research committees. This social innovation was developed in the
context of participatory research and, today, 275 CIALs operate in 7 Latin American
countries, including Colombia (85), Honduras (83), Ecuador (54), Bolivia (32), and
Nicaragua (21).
The CIAL methodology was created in 1987 by sociologists and agronomists interested in
giving small farmers an active and decisive role in the research process. Many of these
researchers are now part of the CIAT Project on Participatory Research in Agriculture,
also known as the IPRA Project.
Today, after more than a year’s work, a draft of the CIAL innovation history is
being reviewed by partipants. It describes, documents, and systematizes the establishment
and spread of CIALs in Colombia and Honduras.
The reconstruction of innovation history not only involved interviews, field visits,
bibliographical reviews, and exhaustive documentation, but also gave rise to a series of
workshops for reflection in which IPRA team members considered and discussed what they did
and how they performed during the innovation’s entire life history.
This process of reflection encouraged the adoption of different perspectives for
looking at the possible changes and adjustments to make to the CIAL methodology and its
implementation, the IPRA team and its work dynamics, and the IPRA Project and its research
interests.
The Colombian cassava mills: composites of social, technological, organizational, and
marketing innovations
Currently, Colombia has about a dozen cassava mills operating in nine of the
country’s departments—Córdoba, Cesar, Casanare, Meta, Bolívar, Antioquia,
Putumayo, Santander, and Norte de Santander. These mills involve public and private
sectors, as well as small cassava growers organized in cooperatives and associations.
The mills, also called agroindustrial projects, are financially and administratively
supported by Plan Colombia, the Pan-American Development Foundation (PADF), the
Corporation for the Sustainable Participatory Development of Small Farmers, the United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP), FINAGRO, Banco Agrario de Colombia, Chemonics
International, Prisa Siglo XXI, and PetroSantander (Colombia) Inc.
In April 2004, with the participation and support of CLAYUCA, the CIAT Cassava Improvement
Project and the Colombian Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development began
constructing the innovation history of Colombian cassava mills. Although each of these
industries constituted an innovation, it was itself composed of other innovations, whether
social, technological, organizational, or marketing.
The major purpose of the cassava mill is to process cassava to obtain derivatives,
especially cassava flour. Thus, it helps answer the need and concern to industrialize the
cassava crop as an alternative for supplying the demand for flour and pellets from the
poultry sector, feed concentrate industries, and food-processing industries, particularly
snacks.
The concept of the cassava mill is that of a network, which, in reality, operates as a
cooperative entrepreneurial project. The various entities involved are the Colombian
Government, the poultry sector as represented by FENAVI, Colombian manufacturers of
agricultural equipment and machinery, feed concentrate industries, and farmer cooperatives
and associations.
Farmer organizations will be the ones who, over the next 10 years, will progressively
acquire mill ownership so that they consolidate their economic and financial structure.
The importance of cassava mills also lies in the opportunities they provide to
communities in their areas of influence that are affected by illicit crop growing and
armed groups. Within the framework of a common project, these communities have a chance of
reconstructing a social context that provides employment, a future, and improved quality
of life.
The history of the cassava mills in the nine departments is not yet completed; on the
contrary, it is still evolving and changing, noticeably so on an almost daily basis. So
far, a CD has been produced, which collects the most relevant information contributed by
the principal actors of this history, as well as the most detailed account possible of
what happened since the cassava mills’ creation to the present. The goal is that, in
the future, this experience will be replicated in other countries where cassava is also a
crop of major importance.
Adoption of common bean varieties in Africa
Monitoring and evaluation activities are an important part of the agenda for the
Pan-African Bean Research Alliance (PABRA). Several
quantitative impact studies document the success of PABRA’s work in terms of high
levels of adoption of improved common bean varieties.
To better understand the process that led to PABRA’s success, CIAT and PABRA
developed a project of innovation history to examine different histories of adoption of
bean varieties. The project began officially in February 2005 through a workshop held in
Kampala, Uganda, to study the following four cases:
- Climbing beans in Rwanda, Uganda, and Kenya
- Bean lines resistant to root rot in Western Kenya
- CAL 96 variety in Uganda
- KARI varieties in Kenya
Each of these cases represents a successful history of adoption but with different
obstacles, objectives, and markets. Each innovation history is expected to produce useful
information on how success was achieved under particular or individual circumstances.
Comparisons across these distinct cases and lessons learned are also expected to be useful
for wider application in future work.
Hence, this project will result in an innovation history for each case, together with
scientific articles and an exercise in strategic planning based on what will be learnt.
|
