Abstract
Research purpose
To examine how mission-led MSME support can institutionalize expert judgement in accelerator settings.
Research motivation
MSMEs in agri-tech face scientific uncertainty, regulatory complexity, and multi-actor delivery, conditions that make generic support models ineffective and call for adaptive, context-sensitive design.
Research methodology
A structured, focused comparison of the UK SHAKE Climate Change programme and Vietnam initiatives. We specify five auditable routines, mission-framed selection with explicit decision rules, staged reviews, proportionate verification using short methods, compact evidence packs, and repository-led reuse, drawing on programme documents, secondary sources, and practitioner insight. Performance is operationalised via translation-task indicators, verified pull at award, time to first real context, evidence-pack reuse, pilot-to-contract conversion, and data-once-reuse-often maturity.
Main findings
Where discretion is codified in visible routines and proportionate verification, routes to first real context shorten, evidence travels across decisions, and pilot-to-contract conversion improves. Variation in Vietnam reflects provincial capability and donor cycles, while the UK case shows gains when buyer and standards engagement are brokered early and archived evidence is reused.
Practical and managerial implications
We offer a portable diagnostic and indicator set that helps delivery organisations publish criteria and decision rules, plan early buyer and standards routes, finance verification, and archive reusable evidence packs to reduce duplication.
Originality/Value
The paper makes expert judgement auditable and portable by specifying five routines and a translation-task indicator set for mission-led MSME support, advancing a mechanism-centred alternative to generic ecosystem prescriptions.
Keywords: MSMEs, agri-tech, innovation policy, expert judgement, United Kingdom, Vietnam.
To examine how mission-led MSME support can institutionalize expert judgement in accelerator settings.
Research motivation
MSMEs in agri-tech face scientific uncertainty, regulatory complexity, and multi-actor delivery, conditions that make generic support models ineffective and call for adaptive, context-sensitive design.
Research methodology
A structured, focused comparison of the UK SHAKE Climate Change programme and Vietnam initiatives. We specify five auditable routines, mission-framed selection with explicit decision rules, staged reviews, proportionate verification using short methods, compact evidence packs, and repository-led reuse, drawing on programme documents, secondary sources, and practitioner insight. Performance is operationalised via translation-task indicators, verified pull at award, time to first real context, evidence-pack reuse, pilot-to-contract conversion, and data-once-reuse-often maturity.
Main findings
Where discretion is codified in visible routines and proportionate verification, routes to first real context shorten, evidence travels across decisions, and pilot-to-contract conversion improves. Variation in Vietnam reflects provincial capability and donor cycles, while the UK case shows gains when buyer and standards engagement are brokered early and archived evidence is reused.
Practical and managerial implications
We offer a portable diagnostic and indicator set that helps delivery organisations publish criteria and decision rules, plan early buyer and standards routes, finance verification, and archive reusable evidence packs to reduce duplication.
Originality/Value
The paper makes expert judgement auditable and portable by specifying five routines and a translation-task indicator set for mission-led MSME support, advancing a mechanism-centred alternative to generic ecosystem prescriptions.
Keywords: MSMEs, agri-tech, innovation policy, expert judgement, United Kingdom, Vietnam.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Proceedings of the International Conference on Emerging Challenges: Business Dynamics In Disruptive Economy (ICECH 2025) |
| Publication status | Accepted/In press - 16 Oct 2025 |
Keywords
- MSMEs
- Agri-tech entrepreneurship
- Innovation Policy
- Expert Judgement
- international