Roadmap for Innovators in the Process of Innovation for Development

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper focuses on sustainable sanitation solutions and looked at ‘Reinvent the Toilet Challenge’. Authors tried to understand the process of innovation for development, role of innovation brokers in the innovation process, and suggest a roadmap for innovators, project leaders, industry partners, local government, and policy 19 makers in the process of innovation for development. I have a few comments after the careful review of this article.

1. Good start to introduction with background and motivations behind the study. However, some information mentioned on the first and second page needs suitable references.
2. Critical research gaps identified from the literature survey is completely missing in this paper. Authors are suggested to include one special section for ‘research gaps and major contributions’ of the study.
3. Why have authors used event analysis method and why not any other? Strong justifications behind the selection are needed here.
4. More details about data collection such as the number of interviews conducted are missing in this version of the manuscript. Try to include as much as data in the paper.
5. What are the academic contributions and limitations of this study?
6. While reviewing this article, I found recently published a similar sort of article below.

Maines De Silva, L., Bitencourt, C.C., Faccin, K., Iakovleva, T.A. The role of stakeholders in the context of 448 responsible innovation: A meta-synthesis. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1766.

Authors should clearly mention the differences between the current study and the aforementioned article.

7. Having looked at the reference list at the bottom of the paper, I found very limited recent relevant articles published in the last 10 years. Most of the articles are before 2010. This issue raises a question on the academic contributions of the work.

 

Author Response

1. The methodology section has been revised by providing more details about data collection and the step of triangulation. See line 184-205.
2. The results have been discussed with the recent innovation journey model literature of Van de Ven (2017) and Oeij et al. (2019).

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

 

Thank you very much for conducting this interesting and highly relevant study.

I have few suggestions for its improvement.

In the methodolgy section it is not clearly stated how was the data analysed in the triangulations steps and how the concepts that emerged from it were later on connected to the results. Also, the methods are just numbered, there is no reference where have they been taken from and were they used and tested previously in a different context.

Furthermore, I reccomed inserting a discusion section where you compare your results with the existing state of the art, and you clearly explain how you advance them with your results.

 

Much luck with the further publishing process.

Best regards,

 

Author Response

All acronyms for the first time have been inserted in the abstract and tables.

Yes, we wish to expose a collective action model of innovation process. We are aware of the important complement to existing models of R&D innovation.

Yes, there were meetings among the NATS, AIT teams, the local governments, and the users in the rural areas in Thailand. The NATS demonstrated solar septic tank and the sanitizer truck to the local governments, and tested them in the field with the operating contractors of the local governments.

Thank you for your suggestions about law and socio-economic development in the context of Southeast Asia. We reviewed the book of Anthons (2003) and understood the difference in the context of Southeast Asia.

The Gates Foundation set up the formal links with the local industry by providing additional funding and monitoring through the development projects between the innovation brokers and the local industry. Project managers and government relations staff of the Foundation will assist and work closely with the NATS team to convince the key stakeholders and the government in each country by organizing dialogue meetings and exhibitions. 

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic of this article is half from engineer and half from sociology within the "Reinvent the Toilet Challenge" initiative of the Gates Foundation. The initiative has the target to bring sustainable sanitation solutions to the 2.5 billion people worldwide who do not have access to safe, affordable sanitation. See abstract: lines 10-20.

The paper aims to highlight the importance of R&D-based innovation in countries under development compared to other advanced systems. This could in turn stimulate research and innovation by the creation and installation of high-quality R&I infrastructure that is also open to business. See lines 32-38. General info on the NATS (Naturally Acceptable and Technological Sustainable) team and its related project are furnished at lines 24-73. The ultimate goal of the project is to catalyse the commercialisation of novel, superior decentralised wastewater treatment systems aimed at radically improving sanitation for the poor, particularly in urban areas.

Particularly, the team has the target to create an innovative fecal sludge management (FSM) hub in Southeast Asia and collaborate with other researchers in the region, and with other teams from around the world to develop innovative FSM that solves the world sanitation problem. See lines 57-60. Innovation project and management on FSM are sketched at lines 61-102.

Figure 1. at lines 104-105 specifies the six steps constitute the essence of innovation processes.

Starting from line 106 on the authors introduce the concept of “innovation broker”, that will be deployed fully in paragraph 2.2. Innovation broker and its functions in the innovation system at lines 120-139. This broker is an intermediary role that boosts innovation needs and facilitates the linkages between relevant actors, involving also learning and cooperation. it is a kind of mediator/arbitrator, sponsor/funds provider, filter/legitimator, technology broker, and resource/management provider. see particularly lines 131-132.

In paragraph 2.3. Relationships between actors and institutional context in the innovation system the authors develop a reflective relationship between actors and the institutional context they can adapt, modify or complement. This has been called “mutual embeddness,” because it allows the actors reflexively monitor actions and aspects of the contexts in which they move, taking into account past, present and future events (Edwards, 2007), thus aiming to achieve their goals and reduce the uncertainty in the process of achieving these. See particularly lines 159-163.    

The main deployed method in the paper is shown at line 174 forward, that is the event analysis. The authors complement their analysis with analysis of a range of internal network documents (e.g. meeting minutes) and external documents (e.g. policy documents and journal articles). See lines 184-186.

Table 1. at line 189 shows the methods.

The Global Growth and Opportunity Division under the Gates Foundation called for proposal from the research teams around the world to participate in the initiative ‘Reinvent the Toilet Challenge’ to bring sustainable sanitation solutions to the 2.5 billion 202 people worldwide who do not have access to safe, affordable sanitation. This initiative has also the target to promote innovative products and policies that can break down barriers to economic opportunity, help people lift themselves out of poverty, and deliver sustainable and inclusive growth. See lines 190-217.

The authors have then conducted semi-structure interviews with innovation network and institutional environment actors to enlighten different methods of spreading sanitation in the world. See lines 174-240.

Details on the AIT (Asian Institute of Technology) team, the most important partner in the initiative, are furnished at lines 208-217.

Other info on the FSM innovation process are furnished at line 224 forwards. The “Cess to Fit” system is a retro-fitting system which can be fitted into existing cesspool systems to hold and treat fecal matters before discharging them into the environment. The “Zyclone Toilet” is a toilet that uses gravity and the concept of a cyclone to separate liquid and solid wastes. See lines 224-232. The Solar Septic System uses solar energy to increase the rate of killing of pathogens, increases biodegradation of organic matters, and produces better quality of septic tank effluents, leading to better environmental protection and public health benefits. The accumulated solid is reduced by 50 per cent compared to conventional septic tanks. See lines 224-236. A Timeline of NATS’ project milestones and activities (2011-2018) is furnished in Table 2. at line 239.

Info on how the Gates Foundation is a major contributor to global health with a large amount of grants and funding and policy influences are furnished at lines 267-287.

Other technical info on FSM are furnished in paragraph 4.5. Innovation management with system approach at lines 288-315. Sanitation in the world is certainly a big issue, if only we think of Thailand, where the study of NATS team reveals 20 million cubic meters of domestic wastewater are produced in each day. See particularly lines 299-300. in fact, it is known inefficiency of FS waste treatment and lack of law enforcement are the major issues of contamination and environmental problems. See lines 308-309.

The study of the AIT research team shows that inefficiency comes from lack of motivation of collectors due to mismanagement and inadequate financial returns as well as lack of awareness of local operators and local governments. See lines 309-311.

Partners and stakeholders in the FS policy implementation must gain acceptance from the markets and inform especially rural people of the social impacts a wrong implementation or the lack of convenient mindsets and behaviors have on contamination of environments. See lines 316-332.

Conclusions underline how the analyses of this case study provide insights on the different roles of innovators as innovation brokers such as the leading role of subject specialization at the regional level, innovative entrepreneurs in commercialization, or policy advocacy in driving changes in the social context. See lines 354-356.

The research also aim to demonstrate key stakeholders are not only users, providers, agency, and industry partners such as local governments, though in the context of a hybrid model especially in implementation phase key stakeholders are those arise from market with different perspectives, and those able to adequate funding on the base of a consolidated inquired impact of processes. See lines 376-385 and Figure 4. at line 387.

 

MAJOR CHANGES REQUEST

 

• Please solve the acronym for NATS both in the abstract and at its first appearance in the main body (line 56). If there are other acronyms for first time in tables a/o figures, please solve also in them.

• It seems you wish to expose a collective action model of innovation process. This model should demonstrate how the sometimes-diverging perspectives such as the institutional ones from one side and the customers’ ones from the other may represent an important complement to existing models of R&D innovation.

Were there meetings among the NATS and AIT teams on one side and the rural population in Thailand on the other? How the local government has been able to communicate to disadvantaged interlocutors that R&D technologies have higher costs, but they are essential to the well-being and health of populations?

• Models are a big issue in event analysis. To explain a developmental process incorporated into legislation and the economy needs many technical languages to be discerned about. You should know the historical bridge to innovation in South-East Asia and be sensitive to the mood of its market’s availability to an «efficient infrastructure, investment in key export-led sectors, the maintaining of discipline and the education of the workforce and, last but not least, the delivery of tangible benefits to ensure the acquiescence of the population» (see: C. Antons (ed.), Law and Development in East and Southeast Asia, RoutledgeCurzon, London and New York, 2003, p. 12).

• I would explain briefly how the Region where the FSM technology has been developed monitors poverty impact and income distribution, also encouraging the small and medium enterprise with micro-finance. This may clear up how the local governments comply to a progressive role in co-operation with national and rural workers.

• To develop basic social services is in fact a demonstration how uncompromising disputes between business/economic interest groups based on the individualistic market principle, and social/community groups based on the holistic community principle in various fields of development policies especially with regard to environmental problems, are inevitable (see: Antons (ed.), Law and Development in East and Southeast Asia, quoted, p. 43).

It would be therefore interesting to learn how the Gates Foundation is probably trying to set up both formal links with the local industry and informal mechanisms with population in order to obtain consent among innovation brokers, the key stakeholders, and the government with the aim to assist also bureaucracy and educational gaps in the Region. 

Kind Regards,

Author Response

1. All acronyms for the first time have been inserted in the abstract and tables.
2. Yes, we wish to expose a collective model of innovation process, and aware of the important complement to existing models of R&D innovation.
3. Yes, there were meetings among the teams, the local government, and the users in the rural areas in Thailand. The NATS team demonstrated solar septic tank and the sanitizer truck to the local governments, and tested in the field with the operating contractors of the local governments.
4. Thank you for your suggestions. We reviewed the book of Anthon (2003) about the law and socio-economic development in Southeast Asia, and understood difference in the context of law and development.
5. The Gates Foundation set up the formal links with the local industry by providing additional funding and monitoring through the development projects between the innovation broker and the local industry. Project managers of the Foundation assisted and worked closely with the NATS team to convince key stakeholders and the government in each country by organizing dialogue meetings and exhibitions.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

I thank you for the concern you have taken related to the revision of your own research.

The paper is significantly improved, and can be published with interest for the readers on a topic is contemporary and very important for sustainability.

Kind Regards.

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

We revised the paper according to the comments from academic editor.

1. We reviewed the suggested articles and book chapters and reflected the concept of Responsible Innovation in the introduction and conclusion sections.
2. We restructured the conclusion section by outlining theoretical implications, practical implications, limitations and future research. (line 413-474)
3. We provided an explanation and discussion on Table 2 according to the recent academic literature.
4. We included additional lists of articles related to the recent research of Responsible Research and Innovation.

best regards,