The new EU agricultural policy aims to strengthen actors’ capacities for innovation by taking into account the complexity of innovation processes. This paper characterizes the key innovation support services (ISS) that support actors in innovating. In the EU AgriSpin project, we analyzed 57 case studies describing innovation processes. We used a common grid to characterize ISS. Our results show that ISS depends on the phase of the innovation. During the initial phases, there is a need for innovative support services (e.g. network building, support for the innovator). In the latter phases, there is a need for more conventional services (e.g. training, credit) at farm, value chain and territory level. Brokering functions and new services are key to supporting actors to innovate by facilitating interactions for the co-production of knowledge, co-design of technologies, and identification of new institutional arrangements. JEL Codes: Q10, O31, O32, O33, O35, O52

Many studies show that interaction with agricultural advisory services impacts productivity and profitability on farms. However, less attention is paid to explaining how this impact is achieved. This paper explores the factors that determine the implementation of newly learned knowledge from advisory engagement to achieve an impact on farm level performance. Focusing on the Irish case, a series of semi-structured interviews from a purposive sample of advisers and farmers from the more profitable dairy sector were undertaken to analyse the key drivers of impact. Results show that a combination of group-based and individual activities based on relevant content focused on key management practices for grassland, breeding, and financial management were key to achieving impact. Furthermore, positive outcomes were dependent on a high degree of trust between the farmer and the organisation, between the farmer and the adviser, and between the farmer and their peers. The findings indicate that while some barriers remain for farmers to apply newly learned knowledge, those that do implement the practices report a positive impact. This has implications for knowledge transfer design which is timely given the focus on these activities in the upcoming Common Agricultural Policy 2023–2027.

There has been a resurgence of interest in the relationship between location and the innovativeness of firms. The research question addressed in this paper is the role that location plays in the innovation processes of low and medium technology firms. The literature on innovation and geographic proximity, combined with a reconceptualisation of the Granovetterian concept of embeddedness, provide the theoretical context. Case studies of four Irish low and medium technology firms, two in the furniture industry and two in the metal products industry, provide the empirical setting. Among the issues addressed are whether or not deep, local embeddedness is essential for innovativeness and if there is a pattern of change over time in the nature of the relationship between embeddedness and innovation. The relevance of the research to rural industrial development is also assessed.