The Hennovation project, an EU H2020 funded thematic network, aimed to explore the potential value of practice-led multi-actor innovation networks within the laying hen industry. The project proposed that husbandry solutions can be practice-led and effectively supported to achieve durable gains in sustainability and animal welfare. It encouraged a move away from the traditional model of science providing solutions for practice, towards a collaborative approach where expertise from science and practice were equally valued. During the 32-month project, the team facilitated 19 multi-actor networks in five countries through six critical steps in the innovation process: problem identification, generation of ideas, planning, small scale trials, implementation and sharing with others. The networks included farmers, processors, veterinarians, technical advisors, market representatives and scientists. The interaction between the farmers and the other network actors, including scientists, was essential for farmer innovation. New relationships emerged between the scientists and farmers, based on experimental learning and the co-production of knowledge for improving laying hen welfare. The project demonstrated that a practice-led approach can be a major stimulus for innovation with several networks generating novel ideas and testing them in their commercial context. The Hennovation innovation networks not only contributed to bridging the science-practice gap by application of existing scientific solutions in practice but more so by jointly finding new solutions. Successful multi-actor, practice-led innovation networks appeared to depend upon the following key factors: active participation from relevant actors, professional facilitation, moderate resource support and access to relevant expertise. Farmers and processors involved in the project were often very enthusiastic about the approach, committing significant time to the network's activities. It is suggested that the agricultural research community and funding agencies should place greater value on practice-led multi-actor innovation networks alongside technology and advisor focused initiatives to improve animal welfare and embed best practices.

Animal Health and Welfare Wageningen Livestock Research PO Box 338 6700AH Wageningen The Netherlands

Bristol Vet School University of Bristol Langford Bristol BS40 5DU UK

College of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Exeter Exeter EX4 4RJ UK

Department of Animal and Feed Science School of Veterinary Science Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Campus De La Uab Bellaterra 08193 Cerdanyola Barcelona Spain

Department of Animal Environment and Health Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences 8750 07 Almas Alle Uppsala Sweden

Department of Animal Protection Welfare and Behaviour Faculty of Veterinary Hygiene and Ecology University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences Brno PalackÉHo TŘ 1 3 612 42 Brno Czech Republic

School of Agriculture Food and Environment Royal Agricultural University Cirencester GL7 6JS UK

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Brunori G., Barjolle D., Dockes A.C., Helmle S., Ingram J., Klerkx L., Moschitz H., Nemes G., Tisenkopfs T. CAP reform and innovation: The role of learning and innovation networks. EuroChoices. 2013;12:27–33. doi: 10.1111/1746-692X.12025. DOI

Vogl C.R., Kummer S., Schunko C. Farmers’ experiments and innovations: A debate on the role of creativity for fostering an innovative environment in farming systems; Proceedings of the 2th European IFSA Symposium; Shropshire, UK. 21–25 July 2016.

Akrich M., Callon M., Latour B., Monaghan A. The key to success in innovation part I: The art of interessement. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2002;6:187–206. doi: 10.1142/S1363919602000550. DOI

Eastwood C., Klerkx L., Nettle R. Dynamics and distribution of public and private research and extension roles for technological innovation and diffusion: Case studies of the implementation and adaptation of precision farming technologies. J. Rural Stud. 2017;49:1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.11.008. DOI

Arkesteijn M., van Mierlo B., Leeuwis C. The need for reflexive evaluation approaches in development cooperation. Evaluation. 2015;21:99–115. doi: 10.1177/1356389014564719. DOI

Lambrecht E., Kühne B., Gellynck X. Success factors of innovation networks: Lessons from agriculture in Flanders. Proc. Food Syst. Dyn. 2015:390–403. doi: 10.18461/pfsd.2015.1532. DOI

Spielman D.J., Birner R. How Innovative Is Your Agriculture? Using Innovation Indicators and Benchmarks to Strengthen National Agricultural Innovation Systems. World Bank; Washington, DC, USA: 2008. [(accessed on 15 October 2018)]. Available online: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTARD/Resources/InnovationIndicatorsWeb.pdf.

Moschitz H., Roep D., Brunori G., Tisenkopfs T. Learning and Innovation Networks for Sustainable Agriculture: Processes of Co-Evolution, Joint Reflection and Facilitation. Taylor & Francis; Abingdon, UK: 2015.

McKenzie F. Farmer-driven innovation in New South Wales, Australia. Aust. Geogr. 2013;44:81–95. doi: 10.1080/00049182.2013.765349. DOI

Klerkx L., Aarts N., Leeuwis C. Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment. Agric. Syst. 2010;103:390–400. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2010.03.012. DOI

Hall A. Challenges to Strengthening Agricultural Innovation Systems: Where Do We Go from Here? Volume #2007-038 UNU-MERIT; Maastricht, The Netherlands: 2007.

Klerkx L., van Mierlo B., Leeuwis C. Farming Systems Research into the 21st Century: The New Dynamic. Springer; Berlin, Germany: 2012. Evolution of systems approaches to agricultural innovation: Concepts, analysis and interventions; pp. 457–483.

Schut M., Rodenburg J., Klerkx L., van Ast A., Bastiaans L. Systems approaches to innovation in crop protection. A systematic literature review. Crop Prot. 2014;56:98–108. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2013.11.017. DOI

Bell N., Bell M., Knowles T., Whay H., Main D., Webster A. The development, implementation and testing of a lameness control programme based on HACCP principles and designed for heifers on dairy farms. Vet. J. 2009;180:178–188. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2008.05.020. PubMed DOI

Main D., Leach K., Barker Z., Sedgwick A., Maggs C., Bell N., Whay H. Evaluating an intervention to reduce lameness in dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 2012;95:2946–2954. doi: 10.3168/jds.2011-4678. PubMed DOI

Main D., Mullan S., Atkinson C., Bond A., Cooper M., Fraser A., Browne W. Welfare outcomes assessment in laying hen farm assurance schemes. Anim. Welf. 2012;21:389–396. doi: 10.7120/09627286.21.3.389. DOI

Ivemeyer S., Bell N.J., Brinkmann J., Cimer K., Gratzer E., Leeb C., March S., Mejdell C., Roderick S., Smolders G. Farmers taking responsibility for herd health development—Stable schools in research and advisory activities as a tool for dairy health and welfare planning in Europe. Org. Agric. 2015;5:135–141. doi: 10.1007/s13165-015-0101-y. DOI

Botha N., Klerkx L., Small B., Turner J.A. Lessons on transdisciplinary research in a co-innovation programme in the New Zealand agricultural sector. Outlook Agric. 2014;43:219–223. doi: 10.5367/oa.2014.0175. DOI

Hoffmann V., Probst K., Christinck A. Farmers and researchers: How can collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology development? Agric. Hum. Values. 2007;24:355–368. doi: 10.1007/s10460-007-9072-2. DOI

Knickel K., Brunori G., Rand S., Proost J. Towards a better conceptual framework for innovation processes in agriculture and rural development: From linear models to systemic approaches. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2009;15:131–146. doi: 10.1080/13892240902909064. DOI

SCAR . Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems towards 2020—An Orientation Paper on Linking Innovation and Research. European Commission; Brussels, Belgium: 2013. [(accessed on 23 October 2018)]. Available online: https://scar-europe.org/images/AKIS/Documents/AKIS_towards_2020.pdf.

Ashby J. What Do We Mean by Participatory Research in Agriculture? [(accessed on 15 October 2018)];1997 Proceedings of the International Seminar on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development. Available online: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/55892.

EIP-AGRI Horizon 2020 Multi-Actor Projects. [(accessed on 23 October 2018)];2017 Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/news/horizon-2020-multi-actor-projects-eip-agri-brochure.

Eurobarometer S. Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals. Spec. Eurobarom. 2005;229:45–46.

Nicol C., Bestman M., Gilani A., De Haas E., De Jong I., Lambton S., Wagenaar J., Weeks C., Rodenburg T. The prevention and control of feather pecking: Application to commercial systems. World’s Poult. Sci. J. 2013;69:775–788. doi: 10.1017/S0043933913000809. DOI

Weeks C.A., Brown S.N., Richards G.J., Wilkins L.J., Knowles T.G. Levels of mortality in hens by end of lay on farm and in transit to slaughter in Great Britain. Vet. Rec. 2012;170:647. doi: 10.1136/vr.100728. PubMed DOI

Weeks C.A. Poultry handling and transport. In: Temple G., editor. Livestock Handling and Transport. 4th ed. CABI Publishing; Oxon, UK: 2014. pp. 378–398. Chapter 20.

van Dijk L., Buller H., MacAllister L., Main D. Facilitating practice-led co-innovation for the improvement in animal welfare. Outlook Agric. 2017;46:131–137. doi: 10.1177/0030727017707408. DOI

van Mierlo B., Regeer B., Van Amstel M., Arkesteijn M., Beekman V., Bunders J., de Cock Buning T., Elzen B., Hoes A., Leeuwis C. Reflexive Monitoring in Action. A Guide for Monitoring System Innovation Projects. Communication and Innovation Studies, WUR; Wageningen, The Netherlands: 2010. 9085855993.

Kleiner A., Roth G. Field Manual for a Learning Historian. MIT Center for Organizational Learning and Reflection Learning Associates; Cambridge, MA, USA: 1996.

Wielinga H.E., Geerling-Eiff F. Networks with free actors; Proceedings of the 19th European Seminar on Extension Education; Assisi, Perugia. 15–19 September 2009; p. 133.

Wielinga E., Zaalmink W., Bergevoet R., Geerling-Eiff F., Holster H., Hoogerwerf L., Vrolijk M., Teenstra E. Networks with Free Actors: Encouraging Sustainable Innovations Animal Husbandry by Using the FAN Approach (Free Actors in Networks): Networking is Sensing Opportunities! Wageningen UR; Wageningen, The Netherlands: 2008.

Klerkx L., Gildemacher P. Agricultural Innovation Systems: An Investment Sourcebook. World Bank; Washington, DC, USA: 2012. The Role of Innovation Brokers in Agricultural Innovation Systems.

Kanter R.M. Research in Organizational Behavior. Oxford University Press; Oxford, UK: 2000. When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social conditions for innovation in organization; pp. 167–210. Entrepreneurship: The social science view.

Chambers R., Pacey A., Thrupp L.A. Farmer First: Farmer Innovation and Agricultural Research. Intermediate Technology Publications; London, UK: 1989.

van Dijk L., Buller H., MacAllister L.K., Baker P., Mul M.F., Neijenhuis F., Plomp M., Wichman A., Yngvesson J., Temple D., et al. Enabling Practice-driven Innovation in the Animal Production Sector; Proceedings of the 23rd European Seminar on Extension (and) Education; Chania, Greece. 4–7 July 2017.