The Diversity of European Advisory Services First Results from PRO AKIS 53. IALB Jahrestagung Terme Tuhelj, Kroatien,19 June, 2014 Prof. Dr. Andrea Knierim Funded by European Commission GA 311994
Structure of the presentation Very brief introduction of PRO AKIS AKIS in Europe a comparative view Diversity of Advisory Services National AKIS policies and coordinating structures Observations and conclusions from stakeholders Conclusions and discussion points 2
PRO AKIS some figures Funded as a Coordination and Support Action in FP 7 Total funds 1.5 Mio 8 European Research institutes involved Dec. 2012 until May 2015 (30 month) Overall goal: Contribute to the performance of advisory services within the European AKISs to provide relevant and reliable knowledge for farmers and other rural actors On PRO AKIS www.proakis.eu 3
PRO AKIS activities and outputs Conceptual framework for the assessment of AKIS Inventory of the AKIS institutions and interactions in the EU-27 through a set of national reports, interactively searchable Comparative Analyses of European AKIS through 12 case studies Policy recommendations for strengthening European AKIS Aim of the inventory: to create an overview on advisory systems in the EU given their recent political attention and the drastic institutional changes they undergo On PRO AKIS 4
Advisory Services to be understood as a part of an AKIS Very brief historical view Agricultural advisory systems an important part of agricultural administrations until the 70ties In parallel the transformation from extension to agricultural knowledge systems in science Agricultural advisory services commercialised, privatised and financial fund reduced in the 80ies and 90ies Since the early 2000 is Agriculture back on the agenda and the need / search for innovations is a major political driver Agricultural Knowledge and Innovations Systems become a key concept for EU and World Bank rural development policies AKIS in Europe 5
AKIS definition information or innovation? Agricultural knowledge and information system (AKIS) indicates a system that links people and institutions to promote mutual learning and generate, share, and utilize agriculture related technology, knowledge, and information. The system integrates farmers, agricultural educators, researchers, and extensionists to harness knowledge and information from various sources for improved livelihoods. Farmers are at the heart of this knowledge triangle. Agricultural innovation system (AIS) indicates a network of organizations, enterprises, and individuals focused on bringing new products, new processes, and new forms of organization into economic use, together with the institutions and policies that affect their behaviour and performance. World Bank 2012 AKIS in Europe 6
AKIS definition information or innovation? Agricultural knowledge and information/innovation system (AKIS) according to PRO AKIS an AKIS concept that aims at describing knowledge infrastructures (Klerkx et al. 2012); - it gives a central role to the analysis of agricultural advisory services (Assefa et al. 2009); - it aims at better understanding knowledge flows within the system, focusing on the issue of knowledge access for a diversity of actors (Hall et al. 2006); - it works at a scale (mostly national or regional) that fits to the aim of describing the situations in the EU 27 member states. Labarthe et al. 2013 AKIS in Europe 7
AKIS diagrams Examples from Ireland AKIS in Europe
AKIS diagrams Example from Bulgaria
AKIS diagrams Example from France
AKIS diagrams useful for - representing range of organisations - structuring interviews - identification of gaps less appropriate for - integration of different perspectives - qualification of linkages AKIS in Europe
Examples of the EU AKIS Weak vs Strong Greece, Portugal: no or few funds for public advisory services; unclear whether farmers are reached Cyprus: pressure for the restructuring/downsizing of ps Fragmented vs Integrated Greece, Portugal, Estonia: weak or no linkages between different actors UK: complex open system that follows the laissez-faire model Austria, Ireland: widespread public support France, Germany: dedicated resources, powerful actors Austria: public research, education and extension bodies well connected Ireland: linkages and coordination between public and private actors AKIS in Europe
Overview of EU AKIS in 2013 AKIS Fragmented (++) + 0 + Integrated ++ Weak Greece ++ Portugal Estonia + Slovakia Hungary 0 Italy Latvia Malta + Spain Sweden Romania Bulgaria Cyprus Lithuania Slovenia United Kingdom Wallonie Czech R. Finland Poland Flanders Luxembourg ++ Strong/ powerful Netherlands Germany Austria Denmark France Ireland AKIS in Europe
Appraisal of AKIS organisational structures: - The sheer number of organisations is impressive - Similar the diversity of organisational and institutional settings - Not always are simple and clear-cut distinctions possible Examples for overlapping organisations Public sector R & E Private sector FBO NGO Ireland Farmers Cooperatives Ireland Private colleges UK Parastatals France Farmer based consultancies
Conclusions on the AKIS in EU MS Actors considered: Public administration, public research and education, private bodies, farmer-based organisations, other NGO not always is clearcut definition of actor possible On the AKIS: overall institutional pluralism, not necessarily linked to fragmentation AKIS concept is useful for overview although not widely known yet; its practical use is restricted AKIS in Europe 15
The PRO AKIS definition of advisory services Agricultural advisory services as the entire set of organizations that will enable the farmers to co-produce farm-level solutions by establishing service relationships with advisers so as to produce knowledge and enhance skills A clear definition of the activity, but not a normative view about the aim, governance, funding and methods of these services 16
Main advisory service providing organisation Public admin (fully public and semipublic) Public education (universities, research institutes) Private (private profit companies, individual consultants) Countries Bulgaria, Finland, Germany (in 5 states), Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy (some regions), Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Romania, UK (Scotland, North Ireland) Slovakia, Spain 2 Belgium (Flanders), Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany (in 5 states), Italy (some regions), The Netherlands, UK (England, Wales) 13 7 FBOs (chambers of agriculture, farmer unions, farmer associations, farmer cooperatives) Austria, Belgium (Wallonia), Cyprus, Denmark, France, Germany (in 6 states), Italy (some regions), Lithuania, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden 11 Advisory Services Source: the country reports, 2013 17
The major target groups by dominant type of advisory organisations Type of advisory organisation Public (fully public and semi-public) Private (private profit companies, individual consultants) FBOs (chambers of agriculture, farmers unions, farmers associations, farmers cooperatives) Type of target group (by rank / hierarchy) Medium commercial farms; Small commercial farms; Young farmers; Large commercial farms; Medium commercial farms; Small commercial farms; Medium commercial farms; Large commercial farms; Small commercial farms; Producers groups; Advisory Services Source: the country reports, 2013 18
Observations and conclusions on advisory service providers Similar to AKIS tremendous diversity in the EU MS: impossible to get reliable data for all, impossible to reach all Strong role of farmer-based organisations however, category encompasses quite different organisational types Upcoming and even strong competition among service providers (F, I, DE, LT) -> Policy makers and farmers have to deal with this diversity and make the best out of it! Advisory Services 19
National policies and coordinating structures France Bulgaria Germany Ireland Portug. UK National AKIS policies Several specific policies National RDP programs for supporting farmers Incentives through research programs Strategies and policies on Research and production Lack of policies No national programs, crossgovernm. agri-tech strategy Coordinating structures Institutions for research planning and for coordination of R&D programs MAF and its secondary administrators Joint ministerial task ; thematic working panels Teagasc unites public advisory services, research & education; Rarely visible coordinat ing structure No national coordinatin g structure
The PRO AKIS regional workshops Feb/March 2014 with the aim to present and discuss inventory Copenhagen: UK and Ireland, Scandinavian and Baltic Countries; app. 40 participants Paris: Mediterranean and Eastern European Countries; app. 50 participants Krakow: Central Europe from East to West; app. 60 participants Stimulated discussions 21
Discussion topics raised in the Copenhagen Workshop Quality of an AKIS how to appreciate the performance? Public and private advisory services cooperation and competition Industries in the AKIS The integration of new actors Innovation processes what changes are needed? Stimulated discussions 22
Discussion topics raised in the Paris Workshop Discussion topics - Relations between public and private actors within AKIS - Changing role of public administration in pluralist systems - The quality and evaluation of services - The potential users and issues for advice Observations - Competition and cooperation between different actors is a topic - Take economic crises into account - Evaluation of services is also a cross-cutting concern Stimulated discussions 23
Crosscutting questions and topics from the Krakow Workshop Privatisation of agricultural advisory services is now a topic in mostly all EU MS; one big challenge is private advisors access to (public research) knowledge Public bodies have to comply with new roles and tasks such as tailoring tenders, subcontracting and coordinating of competing organisations Equally, the roles and tasks of universities changes and they seem to get more and more disconnected from other AKIS stakeholders, especially farmers There is an increasing trend towards management by programmes and projects which is not welcomed by public administration Stimulated discussions 24
Conclusions Heterogeneity among the AKIS is tremendous a comparative appraisal not useful because of the multitude of influencing factors; however a functional focus is appropriate to support comparison and mutual learning AKIS actors have to cope with privatisation of advisory services, i.e. clearly address possibilities and limitations Farmer-based organisations seem to have specific strengths to effectively adopt a coordination role in the AKIS 25
For the discussion Increasing actor pluralism incl. market-oriented actors who should coordinate and how to govern best? Specifically: new roles for the public administration how to foster this transition? How to cope with competition among the advisory services providers? AKIS on the ground 26
Please visit our Website: -> www.proakis.eu Flyers available in English, Polish and Portuguese Deliverables, Posters and Country reports Inventory searchable database in preparation Thank you for your attention!