Threats, opportunities and incentives for pro-poor innovation

Many advocates of pro-poor innovation fear a globalised world that is exploited by large corporate enterprises and powerful countries, now including China and India. Perceived threats include loss of local knowledge and powerlessness of low income economies and their enterprises in the face of cheap goods produced elsewhere. Pro-poor innovations, such as drought- or disease-resistant crops or effective and cheap drugs are often not prioritised.

One response has been to turn the perceived threat into a challenge — to harness the power of big business through public-private partnerships (PPPs). The International AIDS Vaccine Initiative is one example - a global not-for-profit PPP working to speed up the development of a vaccine to prevent HIV infection and AIDS.

But poor people have the weakest voice in defining understandings of public need, from which pro-poor policies are formed. Public policy to support growth and innovation thus largely ignores employment generation and the scope for technological paths that support 'pro-poor' growth. This shows the importance not just of the public sector holding the private sector to account, but of the public sector itself being accountable to poor people.

The globalised world can offer opportunities for pro-poor innovation — fair trade and ethical goods markets, for example, offer opportunities for pro-poor innovation without having to compete directly with corporate giants or the new Asian powers.

Local knowledge

Rather than tending towards a uniform knowledge, the world holds many types of knowledge. Local knowledge is crucial for survival, but for poor people to be agents of their own development, it is not enough. Innovation concerns the production and application of knowledge. The production of knowledge is achieved by exposing what we know to what we do not know. In this sense two kinds of knowledge network are potentially important inputs to pro-poor innovation:

• Networks (local, national or international) where people in the same sector, such as farming, can share and compare their knowledge.
• Networks where people in different knowledge domains share and compare their understandings of problems or challenges they have in common.

Motivation

For the potential of pro-poor innovation to be realised, motivation is required. Volunteered motivation is not enough: institutionalised incentives are also needed.

• In the public sector, the incentive for pro-poor innovation is linked ultimately to some form of democratic accountability. This is important if PPPs are put forward. Governments are unlikely to make serious demands on the private sector if they are not committed themselves.
• Innovation is an essential element of the capitalist economy, where market competitiveness and profit-seeking are the incentives. But corporate business will engage in pro-poor practices if they are seen, for example, to enhance brand image locally or amongst well informed consumers globally.
• Employees motivated by the 'professional challenge' of contributing to a better world can be found in the private and public sectors:
  • Pride in doing a good job and the contribution to a greater social good is important for organisations like UK-based group Engineers Against Poverty, or firms conscious of their corporate responsibility such as design consulting engineers, Arup.
  • UK municipal authority engineers working with counterparts in Uganda found themselves inspired, and reminded of how the great public works in the UK in the 19th century defined their profession and built its status.

Our unequal, globalised world poses major challenges for pro-poor innovation, for which the mechanism of PPPs is not necessarily the answer. There are opportunities, however, because of our ability to communicate globally. Our different types of knowledge are a potential source of joint learning: a good start would be to leave behind old knowledge divides, such as local versus global, and scientific versus lay. We need instead to build on key incentives for pro-poor innovation.

Gordon Wilson
Development Policy and Practice, Faculty of Technology, The Open University, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK
T +44 (0)1908 653548
G.A.Wilson@open.ac.uk

See also

'The International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI): Is it Getting New Science and Technology to the World's Neglected Majority?', World Development, 34(1), pages 16-30, by Joanna Chataway and James Smith, 2006

'Promoting Innovation, Productivity and Industrial Growth and Reducing Poverty: Bridging the Policy Gap', European Journal of Development Research, 19(1), pages 1-12, by Maureen Macintosh, Joanna Chataway and Marcel Wuyts, 2007

'Knowledge, Learning and Practice in North-South Municipal Partnerships', Local Government Studies, 33(2), pages 253-69, by Gordon Wilson and Hazel Johnson, 2007

Views expressed on these pages are not necessarily those of DFID, IDS, id21 or other contributing institutions. Copyright remains with the original authors but (unless stated otherwise) any article may be copied or quoted without restriction, provided both source (id21, insights) and authors are properly acknowledged and informed. Copyright © 2006 id21. All rights reserved.