000			04303nab|a22003857a|4500
001			67560
003			MX-TxCIM
005			20240607164010.0
008			20246s2024||||mx |||p|op||||00||0|eng|d
022			_a0308-521X
022			_a1873-2267 (Online)
024	8		_ahttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2024.103999
040			_aMX-TxCIM
041			_aeng
100	1		_aMcGuire, E. _934180
245	1	0	_aEquity principles : _bUsing social theory for more effective social transformation in agricultural research for development
260			_bElsevier Ltd, _c2024. _aUnited Kingdom :
500			_aPeer review
520			_aCONTEXT: Agricultural innovations and their applications are increasingly recognized as crucial mechanisms for achieving the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Actors in agricultural research for development (AR4D) frequently use Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS) frameworks to comprehend the ecosystems within which innovations are developed and scaled. Given the SDGs' emphasis on social outcomes, a reflection on social diversity, power, and the integration of social theory into AIS and AR4D tools is crucial for addressing the nuances of social objectives. OBJECTIVE: This research critically evaluates AIS frameworks and AR4D tools through applying social theory to enhance social outcomes. We offer practical application through the development of “Equity Principles for Social Transformation (EPs).” These EPs are designed to guide AR4D organizations in innovation and scaling efforts that effectively achieve meaningful social outcomes. Through this approach, we aim to enrich the conceptual understanding of equity within AIS and provide practical strategies for implementing these insights, thus empowering AR4D actors to be more effective. METHODS: We start by selecting key social theories to analyze global power imbalances and local social exclusion within AIS frameworks and AR4D tools. Using these theories, we examine three case studies to uncover gaps in their approach to social dimensions. We categorize these gaps through thematic analysis and formulate EPs informed by social theories and a practical understanding of AR4D tools. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Equity analysis of each case study reveals gaps in understanding social implications within upstream and downstream research efforts. These gaps include insufficient addressing of power dynamics and agency recognition, lack of comprehensive guidance on critical social components, oversight of cultural and institutional norms, exacerbation of social inequities, and the case studies' limitations in flexibility for addressing social inclusion effectively. Additionally, there is a notable lack of clear operational guidelines for applying the frameworks in diverse contexts, including the challenge of translating conceptual levels into local action. Seven EPs were developed: recognize AR4D power dynamics; define goals, anti-goals, and for whom; build global “horizontal” partnerships; acknowledge social differences among innovation users and non-users; innovate and curate innovation appropriately; assess impact and reflect; and develop systems capacity. SIGNIFICANCE: The EPs connect innovation systems with positive social change. They help AR4D professionals consider and evaluate the impact of innovation. The EPs provide an additional framework that enables AR4D practitioners to prioritize user needs from the beginning, challenge biases, and more effectively achieve the social objectives outlined in the SDGs.
546			_aText in English
597			_bLow-Emission Food Systems Initiative _dCGIAR Trust Fund _uhttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/145052
650		7	_aAgricultural research for development _2AGROVOC _98057
650		7	_aEquity _2AGROVOC _910883
650		7	_aGender _2AGROVOC _91123
650		7	_aSocial inclusion _2AGROVOC _928724
650		7	_aSustainable Development Goals _2AGROVOC _910990
700	0		_aMaha Al-Zu'bi _934181
700	1		_aBoa-Alvarado, M. _934182
700	0		_aThi Thu Giang Luu _934183
700	1		_aSylvester, J.M. _934184
700	1		_aValencia Leñero, E.M. _932913
773	0		_tAgricultural Systems _gv. 218, art. 103999 _dUnited Kingdom : Elsevier Ltd, 2024. _x0308-521X _wG444466
942			_cJA _n0 _2ddc
999			_c67560 _d67552