Innovation intermediation in a digital age : Broadening extension service delivery in Ghana

Classical extension focuses on linear transfer of technology. Globally, and in Ghana, we have seen attempts to address the linearity of classical extension with the shift to broader service delivery -  extension approaches that include broader facilitation roles for extension staff. From an innovation systems perspective innovation intermediation is suggested for extension organisations to function more effectively and respond to wider agricultural system constraints. This involves three facilitation roles demand articulation, matching demand and supply, and innovation process management. Both public and private extension service providers in Ghana are expanding on the services they deliver. However, these efforts are hampered by human and financial resource constraints. At the same time, there is emphasis on exploring new Information and Communication Technologies’ (ICTs’) potential to improve and upscale extension service delivery. Despite this, there is limited knowledge of new ICTs’ potential and contribution to facilitating innovation intermediation. Considering that new ICTs can enable new ways of connecting people and sharing information this thesis sought to answer the research question: what roles do new ICTs play in supporting innovation intermediation in the Ghanaian extension system? To answer this research question four studies corresponding to the thesis’ empirical chapters were conducted. The studies relate to (1) new ICTs’ capabilities to support communication and networking functions that are relevant to innovation intermediation (chapter 2), (2) the role of new ICTs in supporting innovation intermediation in a public and private extension organisation (chapter 3), (3) the contribution of social media to facilitating open communication spaces to support knowledge sharing and other forms of collaboration involving extension staff and researchers; and (4) farmers’ choices of information sources for managing new pests (chapter 5). Summaries of the chapters’ findings are provided below, and this is followed by the main conclusions and implications of the research as a whole.       The first empirical chapter, chapter 2, investigates the capabilities of new ICTs to support seven forms of intermediation: disseminating, retrieving, harvesting, matching, networking, coordinating and co-creating. Out of different types of technologies functioning in the Ghanaian agricultural system, the study finds experts (scientists, researchers, practitioners) see opportunities for Interactive Voice Response (IVR) technologies to support action-oriented, linear intermediation such as disseminating, retrieving, harvesting and matching. As for the other more interactive intermediation capabilities, experts agreed that social media messaging technologies can support coordination to a certain extent. However, there was no consensus among experts on which new ICTs can currently support networking or co-creating.Chapter 3, investigates the use of new ICTs platforms E-extension and SmartEx in a public and private extension organisation to support innovation intermediation. Interviews with extension staff and observation of field agents show that both organisation use Data Management technologies (DaM). These technologies that support decentralised data collection can contribute to particular innovation intermediation activities related to demand articulation and innovation process management. They can enable farmer database development to support tacit needs identification for intervention and advice tailoring. Despite this, their potential to support these activities are far from realised and this is due to social, organisational and institutional factors. Therefore, face-to-face communication remains relevant to extension service delivery in the given context and remains better suited to supporting more interactive and collaborative innovation intermediation activities.Chapter 4 analyses the interaction of actors on two social media messaging platforms to investigate their [the platforms] contribution to facilitating open communication spaces to support collaboration involving researchers and extension staff. The platforms are associated to an extension organisation (comprising extension staff) and a research institution (comprising extension staff and researchers). The platform content analysis and social network analysis revealed that the platforms possess centralised network and communication structures - suggesting that platform users participation in especially sending messages over the platforms is non-egalitarian.  This situation is influenced by social hierarchies, organisational rules and users’ identity management tactics. This means that the platforms’ network-communication structures do not facilitate open communication spaces, and as such are not suited for collaborative innovation process management activities (knowledge integration and joint problem solving). Nonetheless, the platforms support the coordination of extension activities on the ground, information dissemination and harvesting for pest/disease monitoring by the organisations, and knowledge sharing involving extension staff and subject matter specialists for individual-centred learning and problem solving by users. The ability of the platforms to support these activities indicates that the technologies are likely to generate useful input for knowledge integration and joint problem solving in complementary face-to-face settings.The last chapter engages with farmers through semi-structured interviews to establish and understand their information source choices for managing a new pest, fall armyworm. The findings show that from a range of sources farmers rely on public extension agents for most dimensions of fall armyworm management, specifically pest identification, accessing control advice and identifying input providers. While for pest alerts, they listen to the radio. Farmers mainly engage with public extension agents because of their perceived credibility. Additionally, the study reveals that farmers use new ICTs sparingly in fall armyworm management. Despite this, the study does points to ways farmers use mobile technology conventionally to access agricultural information. These include making phone calls and listening to radio over their mobile phones. The study further points to opportunities for farmers to engage with IVR technologies that work similarly to their prevailing mobile phone usage.Overall, the study finds that there are opportunities for IVR outbound, DaM and social media messaging technology to contribute to innovation intermediation activities, and these technologies complement human intermediaries (public extension agents) and conventional communication mechanisms (face-to-face settings and radio) in these activities. These insights lead to three conclusions and associated implications for extension policy and practice. Firstly, new ICTs’ inherent technical features do not determine their application, but social factors in a given context shape their use. Therefore, it is advised that contextual considerations and participatory technological design are engaged to foster technological access and realise new ICTs’ potentials. Secondly, new ICTs cannot replace other communication mechanisms. Therefore, they should be explored in combination with classical media and face-to-face settings, and plugged into extension processes where they add value, as this is where huge opportunities for facilitating innovation intermediation lie. Thirdly, human intermediaries remain relevant for farmers to access agricultural services as farmers face certain barriers to leverage new ICTs directly for these purposes. Hence, innovation intermediation models should incorporate human intermediaries alongside new ICTs to have better chances of functioning effectively.