Within the ClimateSmartAdvisors (CSA) project, a structured methodology was developed to map, classify, and analyse Multi-actor Innovation Projects (MIPs) related to Climate Smart Farming (CSF), with a specific focus on the roles, types, and functions of advisors. Using a common classification framework and a standardised EU-wide survey, a portfolio of 147 CSF-related MIPs implemented at regional, national, and European levels was compiled. This portfolio makes advisory involvement visible, comparable, and analysable across countries and project types, addressing a major gap in how advisory work is currently documented and valued.
CSA project partners identified relevant MIPs using clear eligibility criteria (multi-actor approach, innovation, CSF relevance, and advisor involvement). Project data was collected through a harmonised EU survey and validated through desk research. Each project was classified using a common matrix, enabling comparison across countries and project types. The resulting portfolio forms the basis for identifying patterns, gaps, and “white spots” in advisory involvement.
The classification system organises MIPs by project type, funding source, thematic focus, CSF objectives and impacts, innovation type and phase, geographical scale, and the types and roles of advisory services in innovation processes.
For practitioners and decision-makers, the key message is clear: climate-smart innovation is more effective when advisors are involved early, have clearly defined roles, and are supported beyond purely technical tasks. A harmonised mapping and classification approach provides a practical tool for the more strategic use of advisory services in future CSF initiatives and policies.
The MIP portfolio was developed in close collaboration with CSA project partners across 27 European countries, based on agreed eligibility criteria and data collected through a common EU Survey questionnaire, complemented by desk research. Reported projects were categorised by type, funding source, sector, thematic focus, farm size, actors involved and innovation characteristics. This classification supports comparison of projects and analysis of climate-smart farming objectives, impacts, advisory roles and innovation processes.
Some limitations were identified, including fragmented reporting on advisory roles, differences in national advisory systems, and varying levels of project documentation. Advisory contributions related to facilitation, networking, and coordination are still often under-reported.
The results informed the design of Co-Design Innovation Experiments (CoDIEs) within CSA, which test targeted approaches to strengthen advisory involvement where gaps were identified.
