Agricultural mechanization in developing countries has taken at least two contested innovation pathways—the “incumbent trajectory” that promotes industrial agriculture, and an “alternative pathway” that supports small-scale mechanization for sustainable development of hillside farming systems. Although both pathways can potentially reduce human and animal drudgery, the body of literature that assesses the sustainability impacts of these mechanization pathways in the local ecological, socio-economic, cultural, and historical contexts of hillside farms is either nonexistent or under-theorized. This paper addresses this missing literature by examining the case of Nepal’s first Agricultural Mechanization Promotion Policy 2014 (AMPP) using a conceptual framework of what will be defined as “responsible innovation”. The historical context of this assessment involves the incumbent trajectory of mechanization in the country since the late 1960s that neglected smallholder farms located in the hills and mountains and biased mechanization policy for flat areas only. Findings from this study suggest that the AMPP addressed issues for smallholder production, including gender inequality, exclusion of smallholder farmers, and biophysical challenges associated with hillside farming systems, but it remains unclear whether and how the policy promotes small-scale agricultural mechanization for sustainable development of agriculture in the hills and mountains of Nepal.

Purpose: The rapidly evolving nature of agricultural innovation processes in low-income countries requires agricultural extension agencies to transform the classical roles that previously supported linear information dissemination and adoption of innovation. In Bangladesh, strengthening agricultural innovation calls for facilitation of interactive communication and a wide range of mediation tasks within (and between) stakeholders operating in different social spheres. This paper examines how a public-sector agricultural extension agency has attempted to change its roles in implementing a major agricultural extension project in order to strengthen agricultural innovation. This role adjustment is a key outcome of an effectively functioning innovation system because it enables collective actions and enhances performance that meets the needs of clients. Methodology: The study uses a case study design that includes mixed methods data collection and analysis. Using interviews, group discussions, observations, and a semi-structured survey, data were collected from stakeholders of a major regional agricultural extension project in Bangladesh. Findings: The findings suggest that the agricultural extension agency missed the opportunity to deliver the agricultural extension project in such a way that it strengthens collective actions and functions that would respond to the needs of all clients within the system. This is due to institutions that create obstacles within the agricultural innovation system. These obstacles relate to the tendency to remain in a linear paradigm of technology transfer and dependency on public service, the under-estimation and depreciation of intermediary roles of extension personnel (e.g. brokering, negotiating, convening), and finally, an inability to foresee extension methods (e.g. training, demonstration) as the facilitation of interactive learning and knowledge embedding processes. Originality/ Practical Implications: This is the first case study from Bangladesh that provides insights into extant initiatives taken by a public-sector agricultural extension agency to put innovation system thinking into use. The paper discusses a number of lessons, which will be useful for evolving new forms of extension work and applying agricultural innovation systems thinking in low-income countries.

This case study assessed local food stakeholders' use of Facebook and Twitter to support interaction and build their networks of innovation in Ontario. Data were collected using Netlytic − an online data mining tool from the social media platforms − and key informant interviews. Findings revealed that stakeholders could be more innovative in their use of social media, but they would be unlikely to do so, without tapping into beneficial interactions of weak ties, as well as fostering strong ties. They also need to utilize the high brokerage role of key facilitating organizations and develop a social media strategy by integrating both ‘online’ and ‘offline’ interactions.

This paper examines how doctoral students of sustainability science acquired reflective practice skills and engaged in critical reflection. Using the experience of a doctoral theory course on rural studies at the University of Guelph, students and faculty employed the principles of co-production and dialogue to explore the question: What does it mean to reflectively braid knowledge systems for sustainability? To do this, each doctoral scholar independently responded to the question, and then followed the response with an additional individual reflection. As a final discussion, we extended the reflection process and shifted the focus of conversation to ourselves and to the methodological aspects of the dialogical writing that we engaged in. Throughout this process, we used reflective practice and co-production to demonstrate how such processes must be integrated into the skills training and education of students who are taking inter- and trans-disciplinary programs. To finish, we reflect on the role of critical reflection, one that takes the normative dimensions of sustainability seriously, concluding that it is inseparable from reflective sustainability research and practice.