RATIONALE

Foundational concepts of the EIP-Agri operational groups

The European Innovation Partnership for Agricultural productivity and Sustainability (EIP-AGRI) was launched by DG AGRI in 2012 (COM (2012)79) to accelerate innovation across the agricultural ecosystem. Its primary aim is to enhance connections between farming and research, driving the sector's essential transition toward greater competitiveness and sustainability. This includes securing the supply of food, feed, and biomaterials, and ensuring the sustainable management of critical natural resources upon which the sector depends.

EIP-AGRI is built upon an overarching 'open innovation' concept, powered by the interactive innovation model. This model is inherently non-linear and unpredictable because solutions emerge through the dynamic relationships, cocreation, and continuous feedback among diverse actors.

The core functional concept is the cooperation between a plurality of relevant actors who combine complementary types of knowledge (scientific, practical, organizational) to co-create and diffuse ready-to-implement solutions that address the specific needs of farmers and other stakeholders.

Implementation occurs at both EU and Member State levels through several key instruments, including CAP Networks, CAP Operational Groups (OGs), and Horizon multi-actor projects. Among these, Operational Groups are the primary instrument for implementing EIP-AGRI under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), as they are formed specifically for the cooperation on innovative projects.

The Multi-Actor Approach and Interactive Innovation Model of Operational Groups

A thorough understanding of the Multi-Actor Approach (MAA) is essential to ensure effective project implementation and impact by the Operational Groups (OGs). Despite being a cornerstone of the CAP since the previous programming period and a crucial element for EIP-AGRI success, the core concept of the MAA remains surprisingly vague for many stakeholders. On this regard PREMIERE is a European Union funded project that aims to strengthen the MAA by supporting the development of more relevant, coherent, and well-prepared project proposals.

To ensure a project is genuinely multi-actor in practice, it must adhere to seven key principles:

1. Need/Opportunity-based relevance to clearly identified user challenges.
2. Active involvement of diverse, complementary actors from the outset.
3. Cross-fertilization of both scientific and tacit knowledge and skills to foster scalable innovation.
4. Effective facilitation using appropriate methods and tools.
5. Integration of research with best practices for added value.
6. Continuous feedback loops among partners, leading to co-production of practical, accessible outputs ready for use.
7. Dissemination through trusted channels tailored to end-user needs across Member States.

Delivering Operational Groups: Administrative Challenges in a Multi-Actor Innovation Framework

Although innovation cooperation has been part of rural development programming since 2007–2013, the Operational Groups (OGs) under EIP-AGRI introduced a fundamentally new model for public intervention in agriculture. The complex dynamics of interactive innovation model (plurality of actors, equal position in providing tact as well as scientific knowledge) poses significant challenges for administrative delivery.

From the outset—starting with the call for applications—public authorities face difficulties in defining clear evaluation criteria that reflect the essence of the MAA: actor diversity, innovation type, market potential, scalability, interaction quality, dissemination strategy, and project flexibility. These elements are crucial yet hard to standardize, making project selection and quality assessment a delicate process.

Once projects are underway, their evolving nature often requires adjustments to work plans, budgets, and timelines. This demands administrative systems capable of accommodating change without compromising accountability. Moreover, peer-to-peer dissemination activities, such as demonstration events on innovative farms, align better with MAA principles but are harder to monitor and report using traditional tools.

Effective needs assessment and engagement of potential users require robust participatory methodologies that foster shared ownership and accelerate uptake. These must be planned from the proposal stage, with dedicated tasks or work packages, sufficient resources, and clear procedures. Proposals must demonstrate how end-users will be actively involved in co-creation and experimentation, and how transdisciplinary partnerships will be structured.

On this regard, a structured MAA checklist – developed by PREMIERE HEU project - can support both applicants and
evaluators ensures that all key elements are addressed, from initial design to final impact.

FIRST INSIGHTS FROM PRACTICES

The practices showcased in this Compendium illustrate two distinct yet interconnected challenges in the administrative delivery of Operational Groups (OGs). Both are rooted in the need to fully support the functionality of the Multi-Actor Approach (MAA), while ensuring administrative transparency and equal treatment across partnerships.

One practice, from Spain, addresses the challenge of managing project modifications during implementation. It introduces a dual-track system that distinguishes between substantial and minor changes, allowing for greater executive flexibility without compromising oversight. This dynamic approach enables projects to adapt to evolving needs while maintaining procedural integrity.

The second practice, from Italy, highlights the complexity arising from the heterogeneity of regional selection criteria. These criteria reflect the diverse priorities of managing authorities, which can lead to differences in the assessment of the quality and relevance of selected projects and on the consequential innovation paths across the territories. However, the development of robust yet adaptable evaluation frameworks has proven essential to improving the efficiency and responsiveness of future calls. 

Together, these practices underscore the tension between fostering innovation through MAA and ensuring sound administrative governance. They demonstrate that effective delivery requires not only flexible execution mechanisms but also coherent and inclusive evaluation strategies that respect the diversity of actors and contexts involved.

Finally, it is worth noting that additionally to these two practices, others in the Compendium address complementary aspects of Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) within AKIS strategies. Together, these practices reveal a shared trajectory of uncertainty and innovation in both the programming and delivery of EIP-AGRI Operational Groups (OGs).

For example, the Target Estimator (n. 11.4) underline the need for supporting the setting of realistic performance targets and guide resource allocation. The evaluation of OGs’ performance (n. 11.7) shifts attention from project design to broader impacts on systemic cooperation and knowledge flows. Practices involving FSDN indicators (n. 11.3) and the Logical Framework (n. 11.2) emphasize the importance of integrating meaningful metrics to assess innovation outcomes. The SRL tool (n. 11.1) supports early self-assessment of non-technical readiness, identifying bottlenecks before implementation. Together, these practices reflect a shared uncertainty and a search for innovation in programming, delivery, and evaluation—underscoring the need for coherent administrative practices aligned with MAA principles.

Collectively, they demonstrate that effective support for OGs requires a more coherent and adaptive administrative framework—one that aligns with the principles of the Multi-Actor Approach (MAA) and accompanies projects from the call for applications through to impact evaluation.

FOOD FOR THINKING

In this perspective, the following questions can be raised (not exhaustive) to open the discussion and reflect on how to better deliver the EIP-Agri through the OGs under the CAP SP:

• How can administrative systems evolve to support innovation without losing accountability?
• Which set of selection criteria well-balance administrative transparency with assessment on credible and operational multi actor approach?
• How to assess the credibility of a real partners engagement process, and especially of the farmers and silent one, that is not only continuous but also strategically bidirectional (cross-fertilization) to ensure the relevance and coownership of innovation?
• Are current training, support mechanisms (methodologies, innovation support services, applicants’ documentation) sufficient to embed MAA principles in project design and evaluation?
• Should flexibility be a formal design principle in all innovation-related public programs?
• Is the delivery model of EIP-Agri well-structured to fully support and enable genuine interactive innovation processes within Operational Groups?
• How can we simplify and standardize M&E for peer-to-peer knowledge transfer (like demonstration events) to accurately measure impact while minimizing reporting burden on Operational Groups?

HOW TO FOLLOW-UP WITH THE RESULTS OF COLLECTION OF AKIS-IN-PRACTICE!

• Series of EU-level practice workshops (CCoP) aimed at comparing experiences, sharing practices and tools, reflecting on available solutions, and co-creating new approaches to balance administrative burdens with enabling mechanisms for effective EIP-Agri implementation.
• In-country focus groups of Communities of Practice (CoPs) designed to facilitate discussion and support decisionmaking on delivery mechanisms that reduce administrative burdens while maintaining alignment with the Multi-Actor Approach (MAA).
• Focus group sessions aimed at defining the scope of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) for Operational Groups
  (OGs), to better inform decisions related to EIP-Agri implementation.

FURTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION

• Module 1: The need for systems approaches in agriculture and interrelated fields.
• Module 4: Interactive innovation.
• EUROPEAN COMMISSION – Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development – Unit A.3 (2024): Study on outcomes achieved by EIPAGRI Operational Group projects under the CAP.
• European Commission, DG AGRI H.5., ‘Guidelines on Programming for Innovation and the Implementation to the EIP for Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability’, Programming period 2014-2020 – Updated version, December 2014. Guidelines on programming for innovation and the implementation of the EIP for agricultural productivity and sustainability.