Discovering Innovation, Social Capital and Farm Viability in the Framework of the United Winemaking Agricultural Cooperative of Samos ^†

Abstract

In this study, we aim to explore the possible relationships between innovation, social capital, and farm viability towards sustainability, using indicators from the literature and developing complex indexes for all examined concepts in the framework of an agriculture cooperative located on the Greek island of Samos. Data from the United Winemaking Agricultural Cooperative of Samos (UWC SAMOS) were collected through semi-structured questionnaires and further personal in-depth interviews. The findings revealed a highly complex relationship between these indexes that could not just be analyzed quantitatively. Instead, qualitative data explain the weak innovation and low level of social trust by identifying the “institutionalization of the members of the cooperative”, emphasizing the importance of mixed methods approaches.

1. Introduction

Today, innovation is considered the key to success (and survival [1]) in all economic activities in an increasingly competitive world. The concept (and content) of innovation has been defined in many ways. In general, innovation is considered a novelty that either creates something objectively new or something that stakeholders who are involved in the innovation process perceive as qualitatively new, while other interpretations take innovation as progress or the synthesis of activities [2]. Different typologies have been developed, with one of the most well-known provided by [3], which distinguishes the following four complementary types of innovation: product innovation, process innovation, marketing innovation, and organizational innovation. This taxonomy has proved relevant to agriculture (see, inter alia, [4]). The literature also suggests that creativity is closely linked to innovation [5] and, therefore, despite the fact that its measurement is not easy, it is crucial to have some form of estimation [6]. Nevertheless, according to [7], creativity on its own is not enough to bring about innovation. Creativity is limited to idea generation alone; hence, every innovation requires creativity, but creativity does not necessarily lead to innovation [8]. In this respect, risk-taking has also been identified as a characteristic closely linked to innovation (see, inter alia, [9,10]). Being or becoming an innovator involves risk-taking in the sense that innovative individuals have to be willing to try and accept the possibility of failing [8]. Thus, several scales that measure a risk-taking propensity have been developed [11]. Furthermore, a proactive personality, able to take initiative, has been related to innovation [12]. The above dimensions, creativity, risk-taking, and proactive personality, for this study, synthesize the aspect of pro-innovation behavior similar to [13].

A concept that has been widely used recently in relation to innovation in agriculture and farming research is networks. They are considered to open wider ‘windows of opportunity’ with regard to innovation [14]; thus, they have, in general, become associated with many benefits in terms of agricultural and rural development (see [15]). Among others, in networks, the interactions between their members facilitate knowledge exchange and affect their behavior towards all types of innovation, including the adoption of innovations and the embeddedness of new knowledge, resulting, in the case of agriculture, in the viability of members’ farms (see [15,16]). Among other types of interactions (e.g., family, circles of friendship and acquaintance, voluntary associations, etc.), cooperatives comprise a distinct type of professional and business network; according to [16], cooperatives are considered formalized forms of small firms collaboration or a specific form of social capital with significant benefits to their members and the respective communities. Social capital comprises features of social organization—networks, norms, and trust—that potentially connect and enable people to act together while also providing access to valuable resources. This concept has been used in studies related to agriculture (e.g., [17]) but not in studies of cooperatives as of yet.

Finally, farm viability is taken to be the ultimate farmers’ objective (and one of the pillars of sustainability), in which the measurement of employment and satisfaction are also included. The viability of farms has been a concern of farm studies [18], and many different approaches have been proposed to examine it [19]. Some of these approaches favor economic reasoning only, considering the farm a business that has to maximize its output and/or profits [20]. Other approaches link viability, especially in family farms, to different considerations and decision-making models that include the long-term viability of the farm, the use of resources outside of the farm, and making use of other opportunities that may be available [21].

2. Materials and Methods

The assumptions behind the whole rationale of this work are that there is a relationship between innovation, social capital, and farm viability towards sustainability with respect to the members of networks. For the aspects of pro-innovative behavior, trust, and farm viability, a number of dimensions, variables, and indicators are used from the literature, and complex indexes are constructed. Data from the United Winemaking Agricultural Cooperative of Samos (UWC SAMOS), which is considered a network, were collected through semi-structured questionnaires and further personal in-depth interviews. The research was conducted during the high season of harvest, the period from June to September of the year 2021, to ensure the maximum participation of the respondents. In the final sample, 86 respondents were included, comprising members of the cooperative, employees, and selected participants—key representatives of the Board of Directors (for example, the President)—who played an important role in terms of rural development while also considering (a) vine growers, (b) those related to the innovation of farms and/or for the cooperative and (c) willingness to participate. A number of valid questionnaires were collected, and the data were analyzed with SPSS.

3. Results and Discussion

In this paper, we examine innovation, social capital, and farm viability with regard to the members of a network–agricultural cooperative based on the development of a theoretical framework and, consequently, variables and indexes to measure such aspects and their interconnections. A failure to document a statistically significant relationship between the dimensions of the examined concepts owes to various reasons, for example, the lack of time series data (not just for one year).

The results regarding the respondents’ views on innovation are in line with [22], whose research rural Greece, underlining the extremely weak and fragmented nature of the Greek Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System, which seems to be rather unique in the European Union. Also, in our case study, there is the human problem of managing attention, which is pointed out by [23] because the members of the cooperative largely focus on their harvest and preserving existing practices (as farmers argued through the history of their vineyards) rather than on developing new ideas. The more successful an organization is—in this case, a cooperative—the more difficult it is to trigger peoples’ action thresholds to pay attention to new ideas, needs, and opportunities. The operation of the cooperative significantly determines the behavior of its members regarding innovation. It seems that “They can see the world only through the eyes of the cooperative as they would not imagine themselves out of it”. Consequently, our findings reveal a highly complex relationship that cannot be analyzed through exclusively quantitative analysis Instead, qualitative data explain the weak innovation and low level of social trust by identifying the “institutionalization of the members of the cooperative”, underlying the importance of mixed methods approaches.

4. Conclusions

This piece of work, with the goal to measure, operationalize, and understand the relationship between pro-innovative behavior, trust, and farm viability, combines and assesses the different dimensions of all the examined concepts, using variables and indicators from the literature and developing complex indexes. To the best of our knowledge, these concepts have not been examined together, let alone in the case of a cooperative. Thus, the United Winemaking Agricultural Cooperative of Samos was selected as a case study, as one of the oldest cooperatives in Greece and one of the biggest wineries nationally, where the authors tried to contribute to the deepening of knowledge for the participants and members of this network.