Economic Performanceand Development

Economic Performanceand Development

Understanding knowledge networks from the bottom up in

rural district municipalities: spaces for intervention

Understanding knowledge networks from the bottom up in

rural district municipalities: spaces for intervention

Economic Performanceand DevelopmentEconomic Performanceand Development

Dr. Peter JacobsMr. Tim HartTsogo Sun HotelCape Town15 November 2013

Dr. Peter JacobsMr. Tim HartTsogo Sun HotelCape Town15 November 2013

Innovation in Rural AreasInnovation in Rural Areas

• Holistic & multi-dimensional snapshot of innovation activities in 4 Rural District Municipalities

• Purposeful survey & snowball sampling used for broad-based evidence mapping- 482 enterprise

• Enterprise survey- intermediate step between:• exploratory scoping visits to each local municipality • self-reflection workshop with stakeholders in RDM

Knowledge sharing & networking…Knowledge sharing & networking…

• “Is your organisation /enterprise part of any type of innovation system whereby you share resources including equipment, knowledge, skills, ideas with other enterprises/organisations engaged in similar activities?”

Question width, depth, purpose and stability of enterprise interactions…Question width, depth, purpose and stability of enterprise interactions…

• 75% of interviewed rural enterprises self-reported that they share knowledge for ‘innovation

• Unanswered critical questions:• What are the strengths and weakness of how local

innovation actors interact? • Are these networks affected by enterprise

characteristics and the core purpose of innovation? • How are these local innovation-sharing networks

influenced by government support for innovation, local, sectoral and national innovation systems?

Rural

District

Municip.

Prov. Population (DM) Rural Population Pov.Rates

(Mon-metric)

Number Prov.

Share

(%)

Number Share

(%)

Prov

(%)

RDM

(%)

Umzinyathi KZN 510 335 5% 425 619 83.4 % 45.3% 60%

Dr Ruth S

Mompati

NW 460 482 13% 301 615 65.5% 43% 53.7%

Chris Hani EC 800 883 12% 528 580 66% 44% 46.5%

Mopani LP 1 120 287 20% 969 048 86.5 % 43% 44.3%

District Municipalities- Rurality & Poverty

District Municipalities- Rurality & Poverty

A birds-eye view of RIAT conceptsA birds-eye view of RIAT concepts

I

A

A D P P

O M

Big Picture: Connecting Innovation Value Chain (IVC)/ Activities & TypesBig Picture: Connecting Innovation

Value Chain (IVC)/ Activities & Types

INNOVATION ACTIVITIES Invent/Create Adapt/Improve Adopt/Use Diffuse/Share

INN

OVA

TION

TYPES

Product

Process

Marketing

Organisational

Enterprise types and knowledge sharing

Enterprise types and knowledge sharing

Table 1: Bivariate Non Parametric Test- Share knowledge for Innovation, N=482

Variable Name

No =0;No Sharing=0

Share Knowledge =1

Total Valid

Chi-2

Yes =1 N=123 N=359Observations

Public Enterprises0 92.68 75.21 384 17.269*1 7.32 24.79 98  

Private Enterprises 0 30.08 67.69 280 53.219*1 69.92 32.31 202  

Non-Profit Organisations

0 77.24 57.1 300 15.8*

1 22.76 42.9 182  

Economic Profile of Enterprises Economic Profile of Enterprises

Variable Name No =0;No Sharing=0

Share Knowledge =1

Total Valid

Chi-2

  Yes =1 N=123 N=359Observations  

Primary Sector 0 82.11 65.18 335 12.392*

1 17.89 34.82 147  

Tertiary Services0 46.34 46.8 225 0.008

1 53.66 53.2 257  

Local Market Output Distribution

0 73.17 71.31 346 0.157

1 26.83 28.69 136  

District Market Sales

0 50.41 68.25 307 12.606*

1 49.59 31.75 175  

Internal Resources- Basic ICT AccessInternal Resources- Basic ICT Access

Variable Name No =0;No Sharing=0

Share Knowledge =1

Total Valid

Chi-2

 Yes =1

N=123 N=359Observations  

Cell Phone Access0 5.69 3.34 19 1.3341 94.31 96.66 463  

Internet Access (Private)0 43.9 40.11 198 0.5441 56.1 59.89 284  

Computer Access (Private)

0 36.59 36.21 175 0.006

1 63.41 63.79 307  

Innovation Activities and Knowledge Sharing

Innovation Activities and Knowledge Sharing

Variable Name No =0;

No Sharing=0

Share Knowledge =1

Total Valid Chi-2

Yes =1 N=123 N=359Observations  

Human/Social Wellbeing Purpose

0 76.67 50.42 270 25.173*1 23.33 49.58 203  

Adopt Innov. 20110 53.66 40.67 212 6.274**1 46.34 59.33 270  

Adopt Innov. 20120 52.03 46.24 230 1.2321 47.97 53.76 252  

Adapt Innov. 20110 78.86 77.99 377 0.04041 21.14 22.01 105  

Adapt Innov. 20120 68.29 72.14 343 0.66241 31.71 27.86 139  

Invent Innov. 20110 90.24 91.92 441 0.33151 9.76 8.08 41  

Diffuse Innov. 20110 90.24 74.09 377 14.022*1 9.76 25.91 105  

Diffuse Innov. 20120 83.74 73.26 366 5.507**1 16.26 26.74 116  

Government Support & Networking Government Support & Networking

Variable Name No =0;

No Sharing=0

Share Knowledge =1

Total Valid

Chi-2

 Yes =1

N=123 N=359Observations

 

Aware of Gov't Innovation Assist

0 54.47 33.7 188 16.606*

1 45.53 66.3 294  

Applied for Government Innovation Support

0 78.05 59.33 309 13.948*

1 21.95 40.67 173  

Formal Innovation Network

0 95.93 13.37 166 276.591*

1 4.07 86.63 316  

Concluding insights and puzzlesConcluding insights and puzzles

• Innovation can raise living standards and enhance equitable rural social change- through improved & purposeful interactions among “innovators”

• Know-how sharing and networking across all enterprise types- 43% of NPOs active collaboration

• Knowledge sharing & networking strongly related to pursuing innovation for social and human wellbeing & two types of activities (adoption & diffusion)

Concluding insights and puzzlesConcluding insights and puzzles

• Economic sectors and market distribution matter for innovative collaborations- enterprises in primary sector & output distribution beyond local municipality

• Role of access to ICT for innovation networking generally high (60%-97%) but no stats-sig ‘group diffs’

• Government support for networking acknowledged but a very small share of enterprises are encouraged to take practical steps to access state support

• Innovation networking concentrated among self-reported participants of formal networks as against informal networks