Retrospective Analysis of Stakeholder Engagement Activities in a Horizon Europe Multi-Actor Project: Evidence from KijaniSpace

Background Stakeholder engagement is increasingly recognised as an important component of digital agriculture and climate-smart innovation projects. However, communication, consultation, co-design and collaboration activities are often implemented separately, without a common analytical structure for examining how they relate during project implementation. Case study This article presents a retrospective descriptive case study of stakeholder engagement in KijaniSpace, a Horizon Europe project using Copernicus Earth Observation and Internet of Things technologies to support climate-smart agriculture and aquaculture in the Lake Victoria Basin. Stakeholder engagement activities were planned as operational project tasks within the Horizon Europe multi-actor approach but were not originally conceptualised as components of a unified framework. Methods The study analysed stakeholder mapping datasets, project deliverables, workshop and ideation reports, and communication and dissemination records. Activities were classified according to their primary objective, interaction format and intended stakeholder role. Drawing on the IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation, Agricultural Innovation Systems, living lab research and multi-actor innovation literature, the activities were organised into four analytical categories: Inform, Consult, Involve and Collaborate. Results Activities corresponding to all four categories were identified. Inform activities supported awareness and access to project information. Consult activities generated contextual knowledge on stakeholder needs, barriers and regional priorities. Involve activities created opportunities for problem definition, ideation, co-design and participatory prioritisation. Collaborate activities addressed partnership development, governance dialogue, ecosystem coordination and continuity planning. The categories overlapped, and the evidence did not demonstrate sequential progression of individual stakeholders. Conclusions The KijaniSpace case shows how heterogeneous stakeholder engagement activities can be retrospectively organised through a common analytical framework. The framework is an interpretive classification structure rather than a validated methodology or measured progression model. It may support more transparent documentation and comparative analysis, while effects on trust, ownership, institutional embedding and long-term sustainability require longitudinal and participant-based research.