Learning Portal

Visualised AKIS mapping

Visualised AKIS mapping is a technique that provides a snapshot of actors and linkages within an observed innovation system. It helps public authorities and stakeholders understand key features, strengths and gaps in knowledge flows, through the use of visualised maps that help foster a shared understanding and dialogue between stakeholders.

Page contents

farmer using digital tablet in the wheat field

Basics

In a nutshell

What is the visualised AKIS mapping method?

Visualised AKIS mapping is a participatory qualitative method that provides a visual snapshot of the complex relationships, knowledge flows and interactions within Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS). It relies on the iterative elaboration of an AKIS diagram or graph that provides a static picture of actors and infrastructures of the system, along with the strength (i.e. strong and weak) and the directionality (e.g. one or two ways) of their linkages in certain contexts (e.g. at national or regional governance level and for the entire sector or particular value chain).

By creating clear and accessible visual representations, visualised AKIS mapping aims to foster a shared understanding of the AKIS landscape among diverse stakeholders, ultimately supporting better decision-making and strategic planning for agricultural innovation.

Key features

The process begins with assembling existing research and identifying influential actors within AKIS. This information is used to draft initial network diagrams, which are then refined through iterative dialogues with experts and stakeholders, ensuring accuracy and comprehensiveness.

Visualised AKIS maps typically illustrate key actors (farmers, researchers, advisors, policymakers, businesses, etc.), their relationships (collaborations, partnerships, knowledge exchange pathways), and the flow of information, technologies and innovations between them. Important resources, such as funding sources, infrastructure and expertise, are also often highlighted.

The participatory nature of this method is crucial. Engaging stakeholders throughout the process ensures that the map accurately reflects the diverse perspectives, needs and dynamics within the AKIS. This collaborative approach fosters shared ownership and buy-in from diverse stakeholders, increasing the likelihood of successfully implementing strategies informed by the mapping exercise.

Pros and cons

Advantages Disadvantages
  • Visualised maps facilitate stakeholder dialogue and create a shared understanding of AKIS, thus fostering collaborative evaluation and strategy development.
  • The visual representation highlights key actors, knowledge flows and gaps, allowing evaluators to pinpoint areas for intervention(s) and improvement(s).
  • The process encourages transparency by visually documenting stakeholder relationships and knowledge pathways, promoting accountability within the AKIS.
  • The visual format makes complex information more accessible and engaging for a wider range of stakeholders, including those who may not be familiar with technical evaluation language.
  • Visualised AKIS mapping can effectively complement other evaluation methods, such as surveys, interviews and document analysis, by providing a visual context for interpreting findings.
  • Gathering comprehensive data on actors, relationships, and knowledge flows can be time-consuming and require significant resources.
  • The maps capture a static ’snapshot’ - a specific moment in time that may not reflect the dynamic and evolving nature of AKIS. Regular updates are necessary to maintain accuracy, adding to the workload.
  • The visual representation can be influenced by subjective choices, such as the selection of actors, the weighing of relationships and the visual design, potentially leading to biased interpretations.
  • Complex AKIS dynamics can be oversimplified in visual representations, potentially obfuscating crucial nuances and details.
  • Effective facilitation is crucial to guide the mapping process, ensure stakeholder engagement and interpret the visual representation. The lack of experienced facilitators can limit the usefulness of the method.

When to use?

Visualised AKIS mapping can be a powerful tool for evaluating the effectiveness of interventions within CAP Strategic Plans. By visualising the intricate relationships, knowledge flows and interactions within AKIS, it offers valuable insights to guide evaluators and policymakers. 

However, knowing ‘when’ to deploy this method is crucial for ensuring its optimal use and maximising its benefits. Visualised AKIS Mapping proves valuable when:

Assessing interventions focused on networking and knowledge exchange: 

CAP Strategic Plans emphasise strengthening AKIS by promoting collaboration, knowledge sharing and innovation uptake among diverse actors. Visualised AKIS mapping is particularly relevant for evaluating interventions that specifically target these objectives, such as:

  • Enhancing collaboration and networking: This includes initiatives fostering partnerships between farmers, researchers, advisors, businesses and other stakeholders within the AKIS. Visualised maps can help assess the effectiveness of such interventions in building robust networks and strengthening connections between diverse actors.
  • Supporting the establishment and running of Operational Groups (OGs): Visualised AKIS maps can illustrate the composition of OGs, their connections with other AKIS actors and the flow of knowledge within and beyond the group. This helps to assess the effectiveness of OGs in fostering innovation and knowledge transfer.
  • Strengthening farm advisory services: The maps can reveal the reach and effectiveness of advisory services, identify gaps in coverage and highlight potential areas for improvement in connecting farmers with relevant knowledge and information.
  • Promoting farmer-to-farmer learning networks: By visualising these networks, evaluators can assess their structure, identify key actors and understand how information and innovations are shared within these informal knowledge exchange pathways.

Evaluating multi-stakeholder initiatives:

A number of CAP interventions involve collaboration among diverse stakeholders, including farmers, researchers, advisors, businesses and NGOs. Visualised AKIS mapping is especially useful for evaluating such initiatives by:

  • Identifying key actors and their roles. The maps clarify the roles and influence of different stakeholders within the initiative, highlighting potential areas for synergy or conflict.
  • Visualising power dynamics and decision-making processes. The mapping process can reveal power imbalances and influence networks and decision-making pathways within the initiative, providing insights into potential barriers or enablers of effective collaboration.
  • Assessing the effectiveness of communication and coordination mechanisms. The maps can illustrate how information is shared and decisions are made, allowing evaluators to assess the effectiveness of communication channels and coordination structures.

Analysing the impact of interventions on knowledge flows:

A key objective of CAP Strategic Plans is to enhance knowledge flows within AKIS, drive innovation and improve agricultural practices. Visualised AKIS mapping can be employed to:

  • Track changes in knowledge pathways. By comparing maps from before and after an intervention, evaluators can track changes in knowledge flows and identify the impact of the intervention on knowledge exchange patterns.
  • Assess the reach and effectiveness of knowledge dissemination. The maps can visualise the dissemination pathways of specific knowledge and/or innovations, revealing their reach, adoption rates, and impact on target audiences.
  • Identify bottlenecks and barriers to knowledge flow. The mapping process can highlight obstacles that hinder the effective transfer of knowledge within an AKIS, such as lack of access to information, inadequate communication channels, or mistrust between actors.

Beyond evaluating specific interventions, visualised AKIS Mapping can be employed to understand the broader impact of a CAP Strategic Plan on the overall AKIS landscape. This is particularly relevant for:

  • Tracking changes in the network structure and stakeholder engagement. The maps can visualise shifts in actor relationships, the emergence of new actors and changes in collaboration patterns over time, revealing how CAP interventions influence the evolution of AKIS. 
  • Identifying unintended consequences and emerging challenges. Visualising AKIS can uncover unforeseen impacts of interventions, highlighting unintended consequences and emerging challenges that may require policy adjustments.

Preconditions for visualising AKIS:

  • Clear evaluation objectives. Specific evaluation questions and objectives must be clearly defined to ensure the mapping process is focused and yields relevant data. 
  • Data availability and expertise. Robust mapping requires access to relevant data sources, such as stakeholder lists, project documentation and interview data. It also requires expertise in conducting network analyses, data visualisation and facilitation skills. 
  • Active participation of stakeholders. The success of visualised AKIS mapping relies heavily on active participation and buy-in from diverse stakeholders within an AKIS. Evaluators must ensure inclusivity and foster a collaborative environment throughout the process.
  • Sufficient resources. Creating and analysing visualised AKIS maps requires time, financial resources and dedicated personnel. Evaluators should consider the resource implications and secure adequate support before deciding on this approach.

Step-by-step

The process of applying visualised AKIS mapping can include the following steps:

Step 1 – Define scope and objectives

  • Clearly articulate the evaluation scope: What specific aspects of the CAP Strategic Plan or related interventions will be evaluated?
  • Identify the key evaluation questions: What do you want to learn about the AKIS? What are the key aspects in need of visualisation (e.g. actor relationships, knowledge flows, innovation pathways)?
  • Define the boundaries of the AKIS to be mapped: This may involve focusing on a specific geographical area, value chain, or thematic area within the AKIS.

Step 2 – Identify and engage stakeholders

  • Conduct a thorough stakeholder analysis: Identify all relevant actors within the AKIS's defined scope. This may include farmers, researchers, advisors, policymakers, businesses, NGOs and other relevant organisations.
  • Develop a stakeholder engagement strategy: Determine the most effective ways to involve stakeholders throughout the mapping process. This may include interviews, focus groups, workshops, or online surveys.
  • Secure stakeholder buy-in and participation: Clearly communicate the purpose and benefits of the mapping exercise to encourage active involvement and collaboration.

Step 3 – Gather and analyse data

Collect data on actors and relationships by utilising a combination of methods to gather information, including:

  • Desk research –h: Review project documents, reports, websites, and existing AKIS studies. 
  • Semi-structured interviews: Conduct in-depth interviews with key stakeholders to gather insights on their roles, relationships, and perspectives on the AKIS. 
  • Focus groups and workshops: Facilitate group discussions to foster a shared understanding and identify key connections, knowledge flows, and challenges.
  • Surveys: Use targeted surveys to gather quantitative data on specific aspects of the AKIS, such as knowledge transfer channels or stakeholder perceptions.
  • Analyse the collected data: Identify patterns in stakeholder relationships, knowledge flows, and key resources. This may involve using qualitative data analysis techniques or specialised network analysis software.

Step 4 – Develop visualised AKIS mapping

  • Select appropriate visualisation tools. Choose software or platforms that support network visualisation and allow for customisation options based on the evaluation's objectives and the complexity of the AKIS. 
  • Create the initial map. Use clear symbols and labels to create a basic visual representation of the key actors and their relationships. 
  • Iteratively refine the map. Share the initial map with stakeholders for feedback and validation. Incorporate their insights to improve accuracy, completeness and clarity. 
  • Present the final map: Create a visually appealing and informative map that effectively communicates the key findings and insights about the AKIS.

Step 5 – Interpret findings and draw conclusions

  • Analyse the patterns and connections revealed in the map: Identify key actors, knowledge brokers, central hubs, peripheral actors, and potential bottlenecks in knowledge flow.
  • Link the findings to the evaluation objectives: Assess how the visual representation answers the key evaluation questions. What does the map reveal about the effectiveness of CAP Strategic Plan interventions? What are the key strengths and weaknesses of the AKIS?
  • Draw conclusions and recommendations: Formulate evidence-based conclusions about the functioning of the AKIS and provide recommendations for improving knowledge exchange, innovation uptake and overall effectiveness.

Step 6 – Disseminate and make use of findings

  • Share the visualised AKIS map and report to stakeholders: Present the findings in a clear and accessible way, using workshops, presentations or online platforms.
  • Use the map to facilitate discussion and strategic planning: Engage stakeholders in discussions about the findings and use the insights to inform the design and implementation of CAP interventions.

Main takeaway points

  • The variety of practical uses underlines the application for public authorities, coordinating bodies and stakeholders to better understand the functioning of a country’s AKIS.
  • The visualisaiton of AKIS actors enables a systematic capture of key features, strengths and weaknesses of organisational settings, and relationships. The method reveals key actors, knowledge flows, gaps and potential areas for improvement within AKIS.
  • Visualised maps foster a shared understanding and dialogue among stakeholders, enabling collaborative evaluation and planning. Guidelines and templates are useful for the facilitation of harmonised presentations, enabling the spread of comparative views and mutual understanding.
  • Active participation from diverse actors ensures the map's accuracy and relevance, fostering ownership and stakeholder buy-in. The participatory approach invites contributions from typically underrepresented groups (e.g. farm advisory groups).
  • The visual representation provides valuable insights for data-driven decision-making, leading to more effective and targeted CAP interventions. Graphical visualisation is a powerful tool to map AKIS participants and identify coordination mechanisms.
  • It requires substantial time, financial resources and significant expertise to conduct a thorough mapping and analysis.
  • Remember that AKIS is constantly evolving. Regularly update the maps and engage in ongoing dialogue with stakeholders to ensure continued relevance and impact.

Learning from experience

Visualised AKIS diagnoses have been applied in earlier projects such as the SOLINSA project (Moschitz et al., 2015) and the PRO AKIS project (Knierim and Prager, 2015), which applied a graphical representation of the knowledge actors in European countries. The recent EU-wide AKIS diagnosis was realised in the H2020 project i2connect.

Below is an example of the visualised AKIS and advisory services mapping in Austria, developed within the H2020 project i2connect.

Report AKIS inventory i2connect
Source: AKIS and advisory services in Austria. Report for the AKIS inventory of the i2connect Horizon project, 2020.

AKIS is characterised by a plurality of actors. This diagram illustrates the network of actors involved with farmers and foresters in Austria, focusing on how various groups and organisations are interconnected. The five broad types of actors interacting with farmers/foresters are as follows:

  • Public sector organisations (ministries and subordinated public administration; in blue).
  • Private sector (industries, independent consultants and advice-providing companies; in brown).
  • Research and education (universities, research institutes, schools; in green).
  • Farmers and farmer-based organisations (chambers of agriculture, cooperatives, farmers’ unions in yellow).
  • Non-governmental organisations (for example, charity organisations and environmental groups; in orange).

The breakdown of the various elements of the diagram is as follows: 

Farmers/foresters are the central focus of this map, representing the individuals working in agriculture and forestry. 

The linkages between the different types of actors are shown with solid lines for strong connections and dashed lines for weaker or indirect connections. The diagram highlights how farmers/foresters are influenced by a diverse array of stakeholders, from public authorities and research institutions to independent consultants and NGOs, creating a comprehensive ecosystem around agricultural and forestry activities.

  1. Public authorities: 
    • The Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Regions and Tourism and State/provincial authorities have weaker linkages to farmers and foresters 
  2. Research and educational organisations:
    • Education i.e. University college for agrarian and environmental pedagogy (HAUP) Agricultural universities of applied sciences (FHs) etc. shows strong linkages to the centre of the diagram. 
    • There are also strong connections with research institutes (e.g. Bundesanstalt fur Agrawirtschaft und Begbauernfragen (AWI und BABF) AGES Federal Research Institutes Research Institutes of Organic Agriculture etc.) and Universities (i.e. the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU) in Vienna or the Veterinary University of Vienna), that in turn have weaker linkages to farmers and foresters
    • A box displaying further education (e.g. Rural Institute for Further Training (LFI) Bio Austria AGES Technical colleges for agriculture and forestry Agricultural Engineering etc.) displays strong links to the centre, and is extending its linkage towards the private sector (i.e. input traders and independent consultants that include private consultants and veterinarians who offer direct support to farmers and foresters).
  3. Third sector – farmer/farmer-based organisations: 
    • This actor type offers strong linkages to farmers/foresters and includes producer groups and associations (e.g. breeding associations, pig farmers, etc.),  associations and media (e.g. Rural Youth Austria and Farmers Women etc.), and the Paying Agency (i.e. in case of Austria the AMA Marketing and Agramarkt Austria);
    • Multi-actor networks and projects, including Horizon Multi-Actor projects and EIP-AGRI Service and Operational Groups, focus on fostering collaboration across sectors. These actors are strongly linked with the agricultural chambers in Austria (i.e. the Austrian Chamber of Agriculture and the nine regional chambers of agriculture along with several district chambers of farmers).
  4. Third sector – NGOs (Orange):

NGOs such as Bird Life, charities (e.g. projects LQB and SVS) and consumer information platforms (e.g. Landschaft leben) have weaker ties to farmers, but they play a role in certain aspects of agricultural sustainability and social concerns.

Other examples of using visualised AKIS mapping in practice include:

Croatia: In Croatia, AKIS was characterised by weak connections between public and private entities involved in education, research and advisory activities. Visualised AKIS mapping helped to systematically identify these weak points and fostered more effective exchanges of knowledge and data.

Estonia: Estonia’s AKIS had a fragmented image, but through Visualised AKIS mapping, significant steps were taken towards greater integration. This included nationwide coordination of advisory services, which improved the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the system.

Finland: Finland utilised Visualised AKIS mapping to coordinate resources and cooperation among a diverse network of research, development, and education actors. This helped ensure the vitality and sustainability of their agricultural knowledge system.

Further reading