Capacity-Building Model to Promote Innovation and Sustainability in the Portuguese Agro-Industrial Sector

Abstract

The characteristics of the Portuguese agro-industrial sector limit the adoption and promotion of innovation. A business-sector characterisation was carried out to identify needs and business behaviour. Capacity, in terms of skills and knowledge, motivation and opportunities, is the main factor in innovation and sustainability adoption and the alteration of the behaviours of people or organisations. Collaborative business practices to enhance networking and knowledge sharing and the diversity of skills and competencies, along with several pedagogical methods, within innovation and sustainability training, were outlined. Throughout a benchmarking methodology that analysed various courses and pedagogies in this type of training, it was possible to incorporate reflexive practices and action-oriented training to engage in transformative actions and the work community’s capacity-building creation. Thus, a model was designed to be able to promote the capacity for innovation and sustainability in the Portuguese agro-industrial sector, with training activities targeting its specific characteristics. It is focused on problem solving, technical exercise, and task performance, aligned with the multidisciplinary perspective needed to achieve a vision based on systemic, critical, and reflective thinking and able to answer the future market demand. Therefore, it will be possible for the Portuguese agro-industrial SMEs to establish partnerships and networks that will induce the incorporation of innovation and sustainable practices.

1. Introduction

In the manufacturing sector in Europe, Portugal represents the ninth largest country in terms of the number of companies in the sector (68,214 companies). Of these, 81.4% are micro-enterprises, of which food industries represented around 14% in 2019 [1].

The competitive conditions of the Portuguese economy have improved in the last decade, reflecting export growth and the trade balance. The agri-food sector of Portugal is seeking to strengthen its competencies by implementing and incorporating industry 4.0, the digital economy, and circular economy principles and tools [2] to achieve dynamic and international competitiveness. However, the growing importance of quality and environmental effects associated with production and marketing leads to product differentiation, which increases the importance of services contributing to the sector’s added value. Remarkably, these initiatives provide information, knowledge sharing, priorities, and good practices in emerging and sectoral themes, which results in more innovation and sustainability. In parallel, within the sustainability challenge, waste management is one of the major concerns expressed about agri-food business performance, since agri-food is one of the sectors responsible for generating more waste throughout its value chain. Indeed, limiting agri-food waste and decreasing the agri-food carbon footprint streams is a proactive practice, which involves the capacity for sustainability [3], for resource recovery from waste [4,5,6], and integrating digitalisation to produce a reliable analysis of the extensive misuse of resources and to foster environmental sustainability [7].

The integration of production chains, improvements in value-chain management and collaborative production are examples of the numerous possibilities that industry 4.0, the circular economy, and the digital economy can bring to the agri-food sector. The digital transformation directly impacts how companies manage information along their value chain, enabling information to be treated accurately and in real time. Information is a vital aspect that connects agri-food companies with their consumers, so agri-food companies should provide transparent and accessible information for the consumer market. Nevertheless, aspects related to food security and production-chain management are also an essential part of the initiative. Blockchain technology allows the consumer to guarantee a product’s origin through the transparency of information that is validated multiple times, by various agents, throughout the value chain [8]. Communicating only product characteristics is not enough in a competitive and intelligent market. Companies in the sector must seek to integrate information throughout their value chain, communicate appropriately to their consumers, and allow product differentiation from competitors [9]. Therefore, initiatives related to industry 4.0, the circular economy, and the digital economy often involve emerging technologies. Such technologies are not usually part of the core business of companies in the agri-food sector. Thus, it is crucial to enable, disseminate and facilitate access to training processes to introduce scientific and technology-based innovation. This should allow companies in this sector to accelerate the adoption of industry 4.0 and reinforce competitiveness at the international level. It is also intended to improve the capacity of these companies to promote scientific and technology-based innovation activities for the progression in their value chain, namely product and process development based on in-material values linked to sustainability and ecosystem preservation (eco-design of processes and products, eco-efficiency, and digital economy) [10]. Despite the diversity in the performance, number, and dimension of the businesses in the agri-food sector, these challenges are dependent on the capacity for innovation and sustainability. Therefore, the definition of a capacity-building model for innovation and sustainable training in these companies to achieve an increase in competitiveness has to consider the overall business dimension, the number of employees (usually low), and the geographical dispersion and performance [11,12]. Any training process for innovation and sustainability must consider that the individual, more than the institution, needs to change their behaviour and perception of the world to implement lasting changes in their life and work. Indeed, the factors that influence the adoption of innovation and sustainability by individuals (and their institutions) in their professional practice are capacity (skills and knowledge), opportunity (possibilities and stimuli), and motivation [12]. The aspect of motivation can be further understood with the help of the extrinsic–intrinsic spectrum. If a lasting behavioural change is intended (in daily working practices), then people need a highly internalised or intrinsic motivation, which implies three psychological needs: a sense of self-efficacy, feeling competent and confident; self-determination, experiencing the freedom to initiate your own behaviours and not feel pressured or coerced into behaving in a certain way; and relationship, feeling respect and belonging in relation to both supervisors and peers. In terms of motivational work, it is crucial to help individuals feel free to experience and initiate their own behaviours, to give individuals the opportunity to understand the alignment between their behaviours and what is important to them in life, and personally identify the importance of their behaviours [13].

There are several sets of skills to deal with innovation and sustainability [9] in the complexity of the present world context [14]. Concerning these competencies, pedagogical methods such as lifelong learning, social learning, problem-solving learning, project implementation, or the performance of specific functions should be considered. A promising approach to defining a capacity model for companies is benchmarking analysis. There are several types of benchmarking [15]: internal benchmarking, when comparing a company section with other internal parts and the way they operate; competitive benchmarking, when there is a comparison between different competitors; functional benchmarking, when there is a comparison between functions or processes of several companies in different industries; and generic benchmarking, used when the main business processes tend to be the same in every industry [12].

In the present study, the benchmarking process focuses on analysing and comparing institutional training methodologies for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in innovation and sustainability. Thus, our research, consequently, aims to: (i) identify and analyse institutional training models for SMEs in the area of scientific and technological innovation and sustainability (benchmarking of best practices); (ii) develop a training model for SMEs (with a strong digital component) that can further foster and facilitate the introduction of the technical tools and innovative methodologies developed.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Description of the Sector and Companies Involved

This work is dedicated to companies from the agri-food sector whose activity is part of one of the following subsectors: meat products, vegetables, dairy products, and bakery and pastry products. These subsectors have in common relevance in the context of the agri-food sector, both in terms of the wealth generated and employment created, and also a high potential to grow, either through the optimisation of the processes or by betting on differentiating products valued in national and international markets.

As seen in

Table 1. Subsector characterisation in t variables of Nº of employees and businesses, turnover and sales and costs per employee.

Subsectors	Overall Characteristics	Characteristics per Region: North	Characteristics per Region: Centre	Characteristics per Region: Alentejo
Meat	Employees = 25 Nº of Businesses = 690 Turnover = 4.158 M EUR Sales per Employee = 166.282 EUR/year Costs per Employee = 1.015 EUR/month	Nº of Businesses = 241 Turnover = 2.294 MEUR Sales per Employee = 91.760 EUR/year	Nº of Businesses = 9 Turnover = 0.249 M EUR Sales per Employee = 9.960 EUR/year	Nº of Businesses = 89 Turnover = 6.595 M EUR Sales per Employee = 263.800 EUR/year
Fruit and Vegetables	Employees = 13 Nº of Businesses = 410 Turnover = 2.404 M EUR Sales per Employee = 180.434 EUR/year Costs per Employee = 1.228 EUR/month	Nº of Businesses = 116 Turnover = no information Sales per Employee = no information	Nº of Businesses = 28 Turnover = no information Sales per Employee = no information	Nº of Businesses = 61 Turnover = 3.324 M EUR Sales per Employee = 255.632 EUR/year
Dairy	Employees = 16 Nº of Businesses = 451 Turnover = 3.571 M EUR Sales per Employee = 229.812 EUR/year Costs per Employee = 1.445 EUR/month	Nº of Businesses = 66 Turnover = 11.080 M EUR Sales per Employee = 692.500 EUR/year	Nº of Businesses = 26 Turnover = 0.138 M EUR Sales per Employee = 8.632 EUR/year	Nº of Businesses = 77 Turnover = 2.955 M EUR Sales per Employee = 184.714 EUR/year
Bakery and Pastry	Employees = 7 Nº of Businesses = 6.137 Turnover = 0.299 M EUR Sales per Employee = 42.004 EUR/year Costs per Employee = 863 EUR/month	Nº of Businesses = 1.981 Turnover = 0.299 M EUR Sales per Employee = 42.656 EUR/year	Nº of Businesses = 389 Turnover = 0.124 M EUR Sales per Employee = 17.748 EUR/year	Nº of Businesses = 895 Turnover = 0.549 M EUR Sales per Employee = 78.389 EUR/year

, companies included in the present research work are distributed heterogeneously among the four sub-sectors (meat sub-sector with 690 companies; fruit and vegetable subsector with 410 companies; dairy subsector with 451 companies; bakery and pastry products with 6137 companies, mainly involving bread production). Regarding the number of people employed, the average number of employees in each subsector is 25, 13, 16, or 7.

The agro-industrial sector seems more developed in the northern region of Portugal, which has 2404 companies. Still, in terms of the subsectors considered in this study, considering the number of businesses, turnover value, sales per employee, and costs per employee indexes, it is possible to observe a different scenario, with the highlight performance in the Alentejo and the centre region, and with the worst performance in the four subsectors under consideration. Specifically, we see that:

• Meat sector—the number of companies is higher in the north. However, the turnover differs little from Alentejo, with far fewer companies and both regions above 550,000 M EUR of turnover. On average, the turnover/company in the north is 2294 M EUR. In comparison, in Alentejo, it is 6595 M EUR, which results from a business universe consisting of larger companies in Alentejo than in the north. The centre region has the lowest number of businesses in this subsector.
• The fruit and vegetable subsector was impossible to analyse, because there are no data on turnover and gross fixed capital formation for the north and centre. It can only be mentioned that it is the subsector with the smallest number of businesses, and the north has more companies, followed by the Alentejo and centre regions.
• Dairy subsector—the situation is reversed concerning the number of companies and turnover from the north to Alentejo. That is, there is a more significant number of companies in Alentejo, but the turnover in the north is higher. The average turnover/company in the north is 11.081 M EUR—i.e., these are the companies with the best sales performance of the four subsectors under consideration—while in Alentejo, it is 2.955 M EUR. The centre region has the lowest turnover register.
• Bakery and pastry subsector—the number of companies in the north is very high, followed by Alentejo and centre regions. The average turnover/company in the north is 299 M EUR, 111 M EUR in the centre, and Alentejo it is 549 M EUR. This situation might be caused by a business universe consisting of larger companies in the Alentejo region. Additionally, here, the centre region has the lowest turnover register.

The sector’s characterisation clearly exposes the fragility of its business. These enterprises have many constraints regarding incorporating innovation due to their human and financial features. The need to collaborate and jointly think and develop in this innovative approach seems able to overcome limitations and reach innovation and sustainable growth.

2.2. Benchmarking Analysis

This research adopted a benchmarking process to develop an interpretative and comparative analysis, performing a planning, observation, and reflection process [16]. Benchmarking is a process of searching for best practices through analysis and direct comparison and will allow the identification of relevant aspects to be taken into account in the development of the capacity-building model. Following the benchmarking-process steps [15,17], this study has the following stages:

• Definition of the objectives of the research—proposing a training model within the context of micro-businesses of the agri-food industry (subsectors: meat, fruit and vegetables, dairy, and bakery and pastry) able to produce change in innovation and sustainability and integrate the employees in the development process;
• Determination of the topic of the benchmark—training in innovation and sustainability;
• Identification of the main cases and data collection—using the documentation method to enunciate a set of training methodologies and their contents to be studied and implemented worldwide, considering the need for transformation and effective behavioural change, with the consequent adoption of innovative and sustainable practices;
• Analysis of the different cases.

To be successful, the benchmark methodology adopted (or designed) must be focused on the benchmarking partners and information gathering [17]. The data were collected through documental analysis and description of capacity-building studies identified in innovation and sustainability. They were not focused on the agrifood sector or industry. The focus of the analysis was on cases of training design and pedagogies used and their impact on learning and competency development.

Table 2. Education and Training Models or Approaches.

Education and Training Methodologies
Model/Approach	Description	Pedagogic Techniques
Reflection as a key pedagogy [18]	Reflexive practices are seen as a path to foster awareness, empathy, collaboration, deep listening, involvement with diverse perspectives, and improved and creative responses. Through reflection, individuals can learn to consider and change habits and expectations, strengthen their decision-making skills as they develop accurate perceptions, avoid premature perceptions and cognitive commitments, use greater flexibility and creativity, and extract learning from practical experiences.	Portfolio; Pod; Journaling; Problem-based learning.
Learning communities [19]	They provide a space and structure for people to align around a common goal. Effective communities are both aspirational (inspiring) and practical. They connect people, organisations, and systems eager to learn and work beyond their borders while holding their members accountable for a common agenda, metrics, and results.	Observation; Peer support; Work-based learning.
Education for sustainable development–ESD [20]	ESD aims to empower and equip current and future generations to meet their needs, using a balanced and integrated approach to sustainable development’s economic, social, and environmental dimensions. To address such diverse and evolutionary questions, EDS uses innovative pedagogy, encouraging teaching and learning in an interactive, student-centred way that allows exploratory, action-oriented, transformative learning.	Collaborative projects; Workshops on future scenarios: utopian/dystopian analysis; storytelling; science fiction thinking, prediction; Analysis of complex systems; Fishbowl and Journaling; Critical and reflective thinking.

and Table 3 express the main methodologies of education- and training-specific models on innovation and sustainability promotion and competency development and their principal contributions to this study.

The reflection methodology for education is well appreciated despite some difficulties in participants’ enrolment and the facilitators’ inabilities, particularly in adopting portfolio or pod pedagogies. For some participants, the challenges in understanding how to structure, measure, and evaluate the content and personal development in terms of skills development cause them to express frustration and discontent with pedagogies based on reflection processes. An alternative to overcome resistance to reflective practice is the reinforcement of the notion that this type of process shifts learning by memorisation to the domain of a critical and applied understanding of the content, which enables learning according to the Kolb learning-cycle model [21].

The analysis of the methodologies listed highlights the importance of training for transformative actions and the absolute importance of communities in capacity building. Education and learning communities provide a space and structure for individuals to align themselves with a common goal. Effective communities are both aspirational (inspiring) and practical. They connect individuals, companies, organisations, and systems who are eager to learn and work beyond their borders while holding their members accountable for a common agenda, metrics, and results [19].

Table 3. Training Methodologies for Innovation and Sustainability.

Training Methodologies for Innovation
Model/Project	Description
Open Civic Forums https://civic-forum.eu/	Exceptional opportunity to transform regional economies through an open innovation concept [22]. I-open professionals share their experience in organisational and behavioural tools such as social media analytics, appreciative leadership, collaborative internet technologies, and the facilitation of large groups.
Improving Innovation-management Performance with Sustainable Impact-Imp3rove www.imp3rove.de	IMP3ROVE adopts a holistic approach to assessing innovation-management capabilities and performance as critical factors for competitiveness. Based on international standards-compliant assessment tools and the world’s largest benchmarking database on innovation management, companies can compare their innovation-management capabilities and performance with the average scores of thousands of direct or indirect competitors.
Model THEIA–Technological and Holistic Engagement for Industry 4.0 Assessment https://theia.cotec.pt/pt	The COTEC THEIA tool® is oriented toward management modernisation and allows one to measure the level of digital maturity of one’s organisation and support the improvement process by identifying critical areas for the desired digital transition.
Sustainability training methodologies
Model	Description
Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development	It is based on systemic thinking, recognising that what happens in one part of a system affects all other parts. It reflects the idea that it is important to consider all system components, how they interact and the cause-and-effect relationships between them.

Table 3. Training Methodologies for Innovation and Sustainability.

Training Methodologies for Innovation
Model/Project	Description
Open Civic Forums https://civic-forum.eu/	Exceptional opportunity to transform regional economies through an open innovation concept [22]. I-open professionals share their experience in organisational and behavioural tools such as social media analytics, appreciative leadership, collaborative internet technologies, and the facilitation of large groups.
Improving Innovation-management Performance with Sustainable Impact-Imp3rove www.imp3rove.de	IMP3ROVE adopts a holistic approach to assessing innovation-management capabilities and performance as critical factors for competitiveness. Based on international standards-compliant assessment tools and the world’s largest benchmarking database on innovation management, companies can compare their innovation-management capabilities and performance with the average scores of thousands of direct or indirect competitors.
Model THEIA–Technological and Holistic Engagement for Industry 4.0 Assessment https://theia.cotec.pt/pt	The COTEC THEIA tool® is oriented toward management modernisation and allows one to measure the level of digital maturity of one’s organisation and support the improvement process by identifying critical areas for the desired digital transition.
Sustainability training methodologies
Model	Description
Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development	It is based on systemic thinking, recognising that what happens in one part of a system affects all other parts. It reflects the idea that it is important to consider all system components, how they interact and the cause-and-effect relationships between them.

3. Results

The regions and economic sectors have a large number of companies, organisations, and higher education institutions that are notably fragmented, working separately. Initiatives related to industry 4.0, the circular economy, and the digital economy often involve emerging technologies. Such technologies are not usually part of the core business of companies in the agri-food and agro-industrial sectors, so the existence of collaborative practices that enable the incorporation of technological solutions is fundamental. Similarly, Portuguese business culture does not use shared and collaborative processes, and SMEs in Portugal do not have multiple financial resources at their disposal. Therefore, creating learning communities will require extra effort. However, in general, the creation of learning communities allows access to knowledge related to innovation and sustainability that will not be available by other means. In promoting scientific and technology-based innovation activities for progression in their value chain, it is also important to link with research institutes that exist or are associated with such learning communities.

Education for sustainability requires a transformation and the acquisition of knowledge and information. This approach has pedagogical implications choices, such as critical analysis, which helps to understand the complexity of the contexts, and experiential exposure, which provides a deeper connection with the issues, which can lead to a more empathic connection and sense of identity. Non-formal education and informal learning, including lifelong intergenerational learning in the community, provide students/trainees with critical opportunities to relate to environments and be motivated to take the necessary actions.

The use of civic forums to build knowledge networks and stimulate innovation and entrepreneurship is recognised and aligned with some of the educational and training methodologies already explained (e.g., learning communities). Open, collaborative networks are encouraged based on trust and responsibility. New behaviours are designed to overcome fragmentation, focusing on mutual interests, realistic business opportunities and pragmatic steps. The concept of collaborative innovation networks [23] advances the notion of open innovation.

IMP³ROVE takes a holistic approach to assessing innovation-management capabilities and performance as critical factors for competitiveness. Based on international standards-compliant assessment tools and the world’s largest benchmarking database on innovation management, companies can compare their innovation-management capabilities and performance with the average scores of thousands of direct or indirect competitors.

The THEIA Model and the COTEC THEIA tool^® were created under the Portugal Industry 4.0 Platform Project to raise awareness of and diagnose and empower Portuguese businesses. They are oriented towards management decisions and allow one to measure the level of digital maturity of an organisation and support the improvement process by identifying the critical areas for the desired digital transition.

The Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development, or FSSD, promotes the need for systemic thinking. This approach allows each company to create specific guidelines within its area of activity, always based on the same four principles of sustainability (economic, social, environmental, and cultural), which define how to develop and implement effective strategies. FSSD provides tools that help to communicate effectively, build consensus, and move toward their vision. It uses an upstream approach that anticipates and avoids problems before they occur rather than reacting to their downstream effects.

Capacity-Building Model

The Portuguese agro-industrial sector employs an average of 10 employees, and the subsectors (meat/fruit and vegetable/dairy/bakery and pastry), on average, 25, 13, 16 or 7 employees. Therefore, these are subsectors in which enterprises are small and there are scarce resources, where the individual and individuality are relevant, where action orientation is a condition of success and in which collaboration, both internal and external, is fundamental, and for which shared knowledge and networking are mandatory catalysts. Any training process for innovation and sustainability must therefore consider that the individual needs to improve their capacities and behaviours to implement changes. Reflexive practices are consequently seen as means to foster awareness, deep listening, empathy, collaboration, involvement with diverse perspectives, and improved and creative responses.

The capacity-building model and methodologies want to express the reality of the agri-food sector and its concerns and trends to facilitate and empower trainees to explore their path within a contextual system in an open and collaborative approach to keep learning and grow, as has been highlighted by other authors [24,25].

Action-oriented training (particularly for transformative action) is based on acquiring knowledge and clarifying values, linking abstract concepts to personal experience and enabling the development of competencies. Transformative action requires, among other things, a certain level of disruption of one’s way of thinking, behaving, or living. It requires persistence and determination, which are best obtained from personal conviction, discernment, and motivation. Moreover, regarding an organization’s transition and the implementation of new practices to correspond to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), capacity building in sustainability is a determinant [26]. Additionally, the importance of training in competencies for sustainable development and innovation has described and highlighted the key role that leaders’ competencies have in SMEs’ social orientation and, thus, transformation [27].

The pedagogical methods proposed (see

Table 4. ‘Practices and pedagogies’ proposal for capacity building in innovation and sustainability.

Target	All Workers from the Four Subsectors of the Agro-Industrial Sector Are Organised in Groups of Five Participants in Each of the Four Subsectors
Pedagogies	Work-based and problem-based learning (real context; analysis of complex systems; critical thinking; ideation techniques) Reflective learning (journaling); Communities learning (collaborative network and projects; utopian/dystopian analysis; storytelling; science fiction thinking, prediction)
Support tools and technologies	Zoom or Teams, WhatsApp or similar, videos and document sharing in a Google-Drive-type cloud or OneDrive, shareable by all (joint library)
Trainers	It will be necessary to consider a coordinator and a digital facilitator for each group and 4 to 5 mentors from various multidisciplinary areas (these should be selected for their interdisciplinary capacity and social ease—they do not need to work in the agri-food sector, they can work in another thematic in a multidisciplinary approach for mentoring). These mentors should be available to follow each group for at least one hour per week. There should also be two more facilitators, one with knowledge of innovation and the other with expertise in sustainability, to be able to talk to and monitor the progress of the groups.

) are based on problem-based learning and the performance of specific functions and tasks. Interdisciplinary approaches should be carried out to build a future-oriented vision based on systemic, critical and reflective thinking that enables the establishment of partnerships and dialogue based on the following areas of intervention:

• Mindset: inspirational and aspirational mindset, reflection, contemplation, meditation, self-observation, and self-correction;
• Cognitive: acquisition of information and knowledge, critical thinking, moral reasoning, and problem solving when facing dilemmas;
• Affective: exploring motivational feelings and emotions; exploring emotionally values, attitudes, and thoughts; developing compassion, empathy, and concern for others;
• Behavioural: developing and practicing skills to recognise and manage emotions; expressing values in actions; being aware of the values and emotions behind actions and change.

This proposal is based on a clear and shared purpose and increased interactivity, reflection, and creating spaces for comprehensive participation. The need to connect people is also a basic necessity, since the systemic perspective implies the recognition of the interconnections between the parties, making the whole greater than the sum of the parts. It is then necessary to explore this social capacity for sharing and collective awareness so that the whole can integrate into a full form and find solutions that are more innovative than those that might emerge from an isolated group. As social beings, we need to create the notion of belonging to the group and equity among its members. To ensure that all participants are aligned in terms of the concepts of sustainability and innovation, it is necessary first to provide them with a basic multidisciplinary kit (not focused on the technical and professional concepts) to ensure the equity principle (same starting point or same level of knowledge). The contents must be sufficiently appealing to create a reflective capacity for them. In fact, the assumption in some models based on the inform-and-teach approach constrains the potential of the network participants from academia, producers, and industry to develop sustainable solutions that are relevant and feasible. A shared experience within a training programme increases the likelihood that the network will attract and retain good practices [28].

The training programme’s actions (via webinars and workshops—see

Table 5. Training programme on capacity building on innovation and sustainability.

PROGRAMME
I. INTRODUCTION
Open Online Course—Introduction to the Training Model
WEBINAR—Starting Up—Program Start-up WEBINAR—Context Mapping
II. INNOVATION AND SUSTAINABILITY FOR SMEs
Open Online Course—Develop systemic thinking.
WEBINAR—Q&A and game about systemic thinking
Open Online Course—Develop network and scale skills
WEBINAR—Q&A on network and scale skills
Open Online Course—Develop sustainability skills.
WEBINAR—Q&A on sustainability skills
Open Online Course—Develop innovation skills.
WEBINAR—Q&A on innovation skills
III. INOVAÇÃO E SUSTENTABILIDADE PARA O SETOR AGROINDUSTRIAL
Open Online Course—Presentation of the EU Regulatory Scenario for the agro-industrial sector
Open Online Course—Presentation of benchmarking studies on packaging and waste
Open Online Course—Primary, secondary, intelligent and/or active packaging
World Café—Innovation and sustainability in packaging for dairy World Café—Innovation and sustainability in packaging for meat World Café—Innovation and sustainability in packaging for baking and pastry World Café—Innovation and sustainability in packaging for fruit and vegetables
Open Online Course—Waste reduction and recovery
World Café—Innovation and sustainability in waste for dairy World Café—Innovation and sustainability in waste for meat World Café—Innovation and sustainability in waste for baking and pastry World Café—Innovation and sustainability in waste for fruit and vegetables
IV. INNOVATION AND SUSTAINABILITY APPLIED TO SUBSECTORS, MEAT, DAIRY, FRUIT AND VEGETABLES, BAKING AND PASTRY
STUDY VISITS
WEBINAR—Pitch preparation WEBINAR—Innovation and sustainability applied to subsectors—Presentations and recommendations of the working groups

) aim to provide opportunities for creating and strengthening interconnections between participants after presenting themselves and explaining their views on the future, both from a work and personal point of view. For reinforcement, social networks can be used in digital media, preferably via mobile phone, since most participants should be more comfortable with this solution. Mapping the context through situational analysis to discover and understand the current situation of the sector, and the problems that everyone faces, individually or together, is another training step proposed in the programme. An essential point of this mapping is the definition of the level of scanning of each specific sector. Through brainstorming, companies in the agro-industrial sector should identify current and future economic, technical, environmental, and even social problems.

The proposal training model for SMEs contains 32 actions to be carried out over 25 days with a workload of 65 h. The 32 actions (see Appendix A) are grouped into three major themes, supported by three main types of features as expressed in Table 5. This model is to be applied and adapted to any calendar.

After a brainstorming action on the contents of the training actions (e.g., Packaging/Waste), working groups should be created (World Café) to find innovative solutions to the identified problems. During this phase, they should visit one or more places of work of the various subsectors, and if possible, to a place of art and experimentation in art, to understand the importance of culture for technical and scientific knowledge and even behind everything we do [29]. Participants should switch from group to group, the central section remains for the problem to be solved, which allows everyone to help find the solution to all problems. This also increases the creative capacity of the group and allows for greater interaction. This allows management/entrepreneurship development and soft skills as recommended, especially by dedicating attention to underprivileged groups in the agri-food and forestry-skills ecosystem [30]. These activities should be done in person or online through the partitions of automatic rooms (via Zoom or Teams), in order to guarantee that the quality of interactive tools needs to be coupled with solutions requiring minimum effort by learners, as previously demonstrated by Viaggi et al. (2021) [31]. Finally, the last training phase includes a presentation pitch by every group of the solution found for each problem. This practice will create the notion of belonging and the collective awareness that everyone has the same issues but that together everyone can solve their problems and find the most diverse solutions based on their experience. The solutions will be the object of the final training actions, and the members of the groups will be responsible for their implementation (innovation and sustainability applied to the subsectors consisting of recommendations of the working groups). This approach is aligned with the open innovation and knowledge-transfer models, identified as a determinant for the entrepreneurial and innovative thinking skills necessary to allow for higher competitiveness through innovative products and services [10].

The contents should be structured for the basic multidisciplinary kit to integrate and homogenise the capacities, based on the evaluation and alignment of knowledge through previous questionnaires and based on the results. Conducting training actions (via webinars and workshops) with content defined as basic and necessary for innovation and sustainability for all SMEs. The context in which the model will develop will be evaluated through a situational analysis. It is a hands-on activity that will allow the trainees to take experiences with acquired knowledge and other resources and organise all information to see society as a whole. Considering the size of SMEs in the agro-industrial subsectors in question, it is possible to have the evaluation of the previous knowledge of each individual/case as a starting point, as well as their experiences in the social and professional (and personal) context. The evaluation/ efficacy should be carried out by self-assessment of what they hope to achieve at the beginning and what they will succeed in. This self-assessment will be continuous and carried out at the end of each action. The final evaluation will be made by completing a detailed questionnaire. In addition, participants can also evaluate the model as an entire group in a discussion session specially organised for this purpose.

In this way, it was possible to reach a capacity-building model design ready to be implemented with a working guide (in Appendix A) to be followed and adapted to the different subsectors and businesses. It is possible to understand the programme, the pedagogies to be applied in the several stages of the course implementation, and the evaluation method to be carried out.

4. Conclusions

The benchmarking analysis helped define the training-capacity model of agro-industrial companies for innovation and sustainability. The existence of a diverse and interdisciplinary approach is a crucial factor that strengthens the transformative capacity of training for innovation and sustainability in agro-industries companies, as previously stated. In fact, education and training in the competency development of individuals and professionals are crucial to keep the knowledge of a business up to date with the market challenges and technological innovation, as well as for the transformation of products and processes regarding sustainability. The definition of a specific capacity model plays a key role in enabling agro-industries to pursue socio-technical transformations and innovation internalisation within processes to achieve more competitive and sustainable performance. It contributes to creating coherence towards a shared sustainability vision, supporting innovation, and providing competencies and technical skills around core development processes. In addition, it navigates across different levels (individuals and organisations) and different network scales (interdepartmental, inter-company, and international).

The innovative features of the proposed capacity model for innovation and sustainability in the agro-industrial sector were: (i) The development of abilities in systemic and critical thinking; (ii) The development of network and scale skills for innovation and sustainability; and (iii) Capacity in problem-solving (economic, technical, environmental, and even social issues).

The research-methodology approach used has some limitations, since it provides a snapshot of different, already existing courses and training programmes, despite the help that it provides in understanding certain standards one may be concerned with. This methodology gives a systematic path for identifying, understanding, and gathering information, and creatively developing processes to improve training performance. It is also clear that although this allows us to become better, it also implies that future research must use subsequent quantitative and qualitative methods, particularly to analyse the learning development achieved by trainees.