Abstract

One largely neglected focus in the analysis of mission-oriented innovation policies is mission cocreation between stakeholder groups advocating different solution directions. In this paper, we introduce the innovation management concept of ambidexterity to study how mission cocreation in different mission arenas is influenced by actors aiming to continue existing innovation pathways (exploitative innovation) and actors advocating alternative pathways (explorative innovation). Our case study on the Dutch circular agriculture mission highlights how an initial top-down strategy development was dominated by exploitative forces, despite ambitions to secure broad stakeholder participation. Government-led efforts to still engage exploration-minded actors, and restore ambidexterity, were hampered by potential contributors feeling excluded from the policy process. These findings underline the risk that openness of missions, required for broad stakeholder involvement, might also reinforce preexisting contestation and innovation pathways. Overall, our findings demonstrate a trade-off between maximizing efficiency and speed versus obtaining novel perspectives and wide societal legitimacy.