The 5 C’s of innovation ecosystems

The 5 C’s of innovation ecosystems

The 5 C’s of innovation ecosystems

The application of innovative models in international development has captured the attention of program implementers, funders, researchers and policymakers alike. Numerous innovations have been conceived and launched, however, there are many obstacles to identifying and accelerating the spread of innovative policies and practices that improve the lives of the poor.

Throughout our five years documenting and tracking innovations across health, education, and water, sanitation and hygiene, we noted that there were few examples of programs reaching scale. Innovations have potential for impact, but many of them face challenges of quality, affordability and sustainability, which limit their potential to scale and adapt. We also noted promising models seeking to scale require iteration to learn and improve upon their practices, but the cost of learning can be steep, and available sources of funding do not always align with programs’ “learning” needs.

Informal providers gather for a meeting with hospital staff and researchers outside of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Photo by: Alex Robinson / Center for Health Market Innovations

Informal providers gather for a meeting with hospital staff and researchers outside of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Photo by: Alex Robinson / Center for Health Market Innovations

Results for Development Institute has launched a series of innovation platforms — including the Center for Health Market Innovations, the Center for Education Innovations, and Innovations in WASH — to address these critical challenges and find new approaches to creating system-level change and diffusing promising components of programs beyond scaling one or two organizations. Early on, we realized that our simple mandate translated into a very complex set of activities. When we set out to document innovative programs, we found that the tools available for obtaining and spreading information about innovations were lacking. There was little information on which innovations work well and “how and why” these models are working. And few steps had been made toward and obvious way of addressing these deficiencies.

The evolution of our work in health, education and WASH has shown that while our activities resulting in the scale-up of individual innovations are necessary and important, the effects of connecting multiple organizations to funders, governments and each other has a much greater impact on the broader innovation ecosystem. We’ve learned a lot about what innovators and other actors need to drive successful innovations forward.

The five C’s reflect the lessons we’ve learned in this process and the essential approaches for anyone working to transform promising innovations into opportunities for social change.

1. Core components.

While we began documenting innovative models, we saw stakeholder demand for guidance to develop coordinated, comprehensive and long-term approaches that go beyond the effects of scaling one organization to create system-level change through the identification of proven practices and “core components,” such as the use of telemedicine to bridge access challenges or training of community health workers to deliver maternal health services.

Highlighting these “core components” of innovation, in addition to specific innovators that have applied this concept, can help adapt that innovation to a new context. CHMI has already launched some initial work in this area — for example, recognizing that many organizations and individuals want to find and adapt relevant promising practices from others.

Few program models, though, are replicable in their entirety. R4D has launched a framework that seeks to facilitate the transfer of innovation. Organizations are now using the R4D adaptation framework to better understand the steps necessary to adapt innovations to new contexts.

2. Continuous learning.

In the process of understanding “what works” in innovation, we have learned that most programs are really still works in progress. Promising models seeking to scale require iteration to learn and improve upon their practices, but the cost of learning can be steep, and available sources of funding do not always align with programs’ learning needs.

We’ve supported such process by bringing multiple organizations together for face-to-face learning exchanges, which are designed to provide targeted learning opportunities for innovators. R4D also has a new approach to program monitoring, evaluation, and learning called the Learning Lab. R4D is working with select health and education programs to focus monitoring and evaluation efforts at an earlier stage of the program cycle, by putting structured learning, experimentation and feedback at the heart of program design, piloting and scale-up efforts.

3. Co-creation and collaboration.

Few existing opportunities allow programs themselves to take ownership of the learning process and work collaboratively with peers who face some of the same challenges and with funders looking to engage in the problem-solving process. To make true progress, we must engage collaboratively with innovators and across sectors.

We have found that innovators — sometimes even people working on similar problems or models in the same city — don’t know each other. Collaborative networks bring together groups of innovators working on similar models to collectively problem-solve and publicly document their lessons.

In the past year, we experimented with a group of primary care innovators who have now produced a primary care innovators handbook as a way to share tacit knowledge gained in the field. Other network examples include multisectoral groups seeking to address a particular problem through government and private sector collaboration.

We have measured the great opportunity for people working on similar innovations to learn a lot from each other. The global institutions working with many innovators can be mediators to help them find each other and offer platforms for interaction.

4. Country innovation partners.

We work through a global network of country-based organizations. Our partners act as facilitators of key local and regional actors, carrying out the dual role of connecting programs to opportunities and encouraging system-level change. Our country innovation partners have added value at the country level in several distinct ways: raising awareness about the potential of innovations; creating large, in-country networks that leverage global learning and lower barriers to collaboration; leveraging our platforms, networks and other work to amplify the impact of their own and others’ efforts; and working with governments and funders to foster the uptake of promising innovations.

As part of their work, partners have developed a number of country-level mechanisms to source and support programs, such as competitions, innovation hackathons and pitch series aimed at fostering country-level support to innovations among donors, investors and policymakers. These locally driven efforts have generated new awareness of what works and sparked increased momentum around the potential of innovations.

5. Copycats.

If we are truly ready to scale innovation and move beyond just a few organizations doing well, we need to create copycats. Currently, we are systematically identifying receptor sites through the lens of adaptation and replication of innovations.

How do we find organizations that can be good copycats?  These organizations play a slightly different role than the initial innovators but are no less important in strengthening entire systems or industries that are able to engage with the government and other ecosystem players.

We have found that to help countries build highly performing health and education systems that serve the poor, we need larger industries of providers that go beyond one or two successful organizations. Copycats should be encouraged as a way of promoting promising models and vibrant systems and industries.

Our work over the past five years has taught us the importance of working directly with innovators, country and regional partners, researchers and governments to understand how innovations can gain success and get to scale. This group of stakeholders represents the sixth “C” of building vibrant innovation ecosystems — community. We hope you’ll join ours.

This article originally appeared on the devex website.

7

Updates direct to your Email

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts and opportunities by email.

Join 7,243 other subscribers

Post categories

Is poverty a driver of environmental degradation or a consequence or both?

Is poverty a driver of environmental degradation or a consequence or both?

Is poverty a driver of environmental degradation or a consequence or both?

The Living Planet Report is the world’s leading, science-based analysis on the health of our planet and the impact of human activity. Knowing we only have one planet, WWF believes that humanity can make better choices that translate into clear benefits for ecology, society and the economy today and in the long term.

This latest edition of the Living Planet Report is not for the faint-hearted. One key point that jumps out is that the Living Planet Index (LPI), which measures more than 10,000 representative populations of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and fish, has declined by 52 per cent since 1970.

Put another way, in less than two human generations, population sizes of vertebrate species have dropped by half. These are the living forms that constitute the fabric of the ecosystems which sustain life on Earth – and the barometer of what we are doing to our own planet, our only home. We ignore their decline at our peril.

We are using nature’s gifts as if we had more than just one Earth at our disposal. By taking more from our ecosystems and natural processes than can be replenished, we are jeopardizing our very future. Nature conservation and sustainable development go hand-in-hand. They are not only about preserving biodiversity and wild places, but just as much about safeguarding the future of humanity – our well-being, economy, food security and social stability – indeed, our very survival.

In a world where so many people live in poverty, it may appear as though protecting nature is a luxury. But it is quite the opposite. For many of the world’s poorest people, it is a lifeline. Importantly though, we are all in this together. We all need nutritious food, fresh water and clean air – wherever in the world we live.

Things look so worrying that it may seem difficult to feel positive about the future. Difficult, certainly, but not impossible – because it is in ourselves, who have caused the problem, that we can find the solution. Now we must work to ensure that the upcoming generation can seize the opportunity that we have so far failed to grasp, to close this destructive chapter in our history, and build a future where people can live and prosper in harmony with nature.

We are all connected – and collectively, we have the potential to create the solutions that will safeguard the future of this, our one and only planet.

This article originally appeared on the WWF website.

7

Updates direct to your Email

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts and opportunities by email.

Join 7,243 other subscribers

Post categories

Change Agent: Calls veterinary toxicology a poorly understood profession

Change Agent: Calls veterinary toxicology a poorly understood profession

Change Agent: Calls veterinary toxicology a poorly understood profession

AMES, Iowa – Wilson Rumbeiha calls veterinary toxicology a poorly understood profession in the United States, and it’s easy to see his point.

The equipment required to run a veterinary toxicology lab is costly, and some veterinary schools don’t keep a board-certified toxicologist on staff at all, Rumbeiha said.

Unless there’s a sudden crisis, such as the 2007 pet food recalls during which cats and dogs across the country were sickened by food tainted with the industrial chemical melamine, most Americans simply don’t think about veterinary toxicology too much.

But in the developing world – where infrastructure, health care and food safety concerns abound – it’s not so much that people don’t often think of veterinary toxicology. It’s that they have no conception of it at all.

“Even in this country, toxicology is a niche discipline,” Rumbeiha said. “But in Mongolia, for instance, it’s practically nonexistent.”

2. Change agentRumbeiha, a professor of veterinary diagnostic and production animal medicine and a staff toxicologist at the Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, has devoted much of his career to nurturing a better understanding of the importance of toxicology in developing nations such as Mongolia and his native Uganda.

His international vision has led him to locales across the globe, working to instill a newfound awareness of the importance of veterinary toxicology. Since 2009, Rumbeiha has served as the president of Toxicologists Without Borders, a nonprofit organization that seeks to alleviate human disease contracted through exposure to toxins in developing countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean.

It’s not just an animal health issue, he said.  His work bolsters food safety and human health as well.

One Health

Rumbeiha traveled to Africa this month to lay the groundwork for a new program called One Health Uganda, which he hopes will allow ISU veterinary students to study abroad in Uganda to gain experience with communicable diseases that affect livestock, wild animals and humans.

“I want to lay foundations for new joint programs and opportunities to collaborate,” he said. “The world is becoming a global village, and our students need to adjust to that reality.”

Rumbeiha has worked with Katie Davidson, a program assistant in the ISU College of Veterinary Medicine, and faculty at the veterinary school at Markere University in Kampala, Uganda, to establish the study abroad opportunity. Progress on the program slowed last year due to concerns with the Ebola virus, but Rumbeiha said he plans to work on establishing some curriculum guidelines during his current visit to Uganda.

He’ll also spend part of his time while in Uganda working with the Carnegie African Diaspora Fellowship Program, which fosters collaboration among African-born faculty living in the U.S. or Canada and faculty at institutions in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda.

Rumbeiha also traveled to Mongolia in 2014 under the auspices of the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency to help locals establish toxicology programs. He said mining operations in Mongolia have polluted resources essential to herding cattle, creating a need for veterinarians with experience in toxicology to monitor and treat animals exposed to pollutants.

So Rumbeiha led workshops and practical lab demonstrations to improve the capacity of Mongolians to diagnose any toxicological challenges that threaten their food supply. Following his return to Ames, a Mongolian student visited Iowa State to receive additional toxicological training.

Mongolia illustrates some of the classic challenges developing nations face, he said. For instance, it’s difficult to set up a new toxicology lab in Mongolia not only because of the expense, but also the lack of qualified technicians to maintain and repair the gear.

“In Mongolia, as in many other places in the developing world, you see broken equipment because no one is trained to maintain it,” Rumbeiha said. “It’s just collecting dust because no one can fix it.”

An outlook born in Uganda

Rumbeiha was born in Uganda, the oldest of nine children in his family. His parents and siblings still live there, and, though he’s now a U.S. citizen, Rumbeiha visits his family at least once a year.

He earned his doctorate of veterinary medicine degree from Markere University in 1982. He was awarded a scholarship to Guelph University in Ontario, Canada, where he completed a Ph. D. After stints in industry and at Kansas State and Michigan State, he came to Iowa State in 2011, where he is one of two faculty toxicologists.

But it was at Guelph in Canada where he discovered his interest in toxicology.

“My eyes were opened at Guelph when I realized how important toxicology is and how many other disciplines it interacts with,” Rumbeiha said.

Wherever his travels have taken him, however, he said he carries the perspective and priorities he learned early in life.

“My background and my outlook come from Uganda,” Rumbeiha said. “I’m always attuned to international issues important in the developing world.”

This post originally appeared at the Iowa State University, News Service section of the website.

7

Updates direct to your Email

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts and opportunities by email.

Join 7,243 other subscribers

Post categories

Human and companion animal oncologists convene

Human and companion animal oncologists convene

Human and companion animal oncologists convene

Earlier June 2015, human and animal oncologists convened in Washington, D.C. to discuss how they might collaborate for the benefit of both. And the subject was dogs.

Purebred Golden Retriever dog outdoors on a sunny summer day.

Purebred Golden Retriever dog outdoors on a sunny summer day.

Spearheaded by Colorado State Colorado State University (CSU) and its Flint Animal Cancer Center, the June 8-9 comparative oncology event focused on translational cancer research, i.e., studies that seek effective cancer treatments initially with animals but benefiting both animals and humans.

The event had two objectives within veterinary oncology, reported CSU.

First, it sought to identify how to more fully characterize the genetic makeup of tumors that develop in dogs and people, and, second, to further investigate the role of cancer immunology in dogs.

The event was triggered by a need to integrate clinical studies in pets within the larger cancer research continuum.

Many new therapies fail in human clinical trials because rodent models lack the key characteristics of human cancer. However, because human and pet tumors share many characteristics, there is now renewed interest in companion animal studies about naturally occurring tumors.

The National Cancer Policy Forum hosted the event. About 20 academic and nonprofit organizations sponsored the event, which was also live-streamed.

Presentations and videos from the event are available on the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies website.

This post originally appeared American Animal Hospital Association website.

7

Updates direct to your Email

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts and opportunities by email.

Join 7,243 other subscribers

Post categories

Ebola a wake up call for Ecohealth Alliance

Ebola a wake up call for Ecohealth Alliance

Ebola a wake up call for Ecohealth Alliance

Peter Daszak, President Ecohealth Alliance, in this short video reiterates on how Ebola was a wake up call for them and that their research at the Ecohealth alliance has shown that emergence of disease is a result of anthropogenic actions of man to the environment. Further he states that governments are more concerned about economics than conservation, but when conservation threats are packaged as economic threats then this triggers change, he gives an example of China closing down the wildlife market (which they did as a result of safeguarding health and not conservation per se).

View the four minute video here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KLY3jXXs3ZQ&feature=youtu.be

7

Updates direct to your Email

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts and opportunities by email.

Join 7,243 other subscribers

Post categories