From Local Innovation to National Service: Scaling a LAG-Funded Wellbeing Model for Farmers into Finland's Statutory Early Support System - MTK-Satakunta
From Local Innovation to National Service: Scaling a LAG-Funded Wellbeing Model for Farmers into Finland's Statutory Early Support System
Artikkeli – Maaseudun edunvalvonta
From Local Innovation to National Service: Scaling a LAG-Funded Wellbeing Model for Farmers into Finland's Statutory Early Support System
29.05.2026
This article was written as part of MTK-Satakunta’s project From Local-Level Action to Nationwide Operations – Developing the Wellbeing at Work of Farmers, in cooperation with MTK-Vammala. The project received funding from the EU Rural Development Fund through Local Action Group Leader Joutsenten reitti. This article is published in English and Finnish.
Author: Hindström, Virve
Published: 2026-5-29
Affiliations: The author lives in Sastamala. The author worked in the Extra Energy for Farmer -projects as a trainee in 2014 and as a part-time employee from 2017 to 2022. The author works for MTK-Satakunta.
Abstract
This article examines how a Local Action Group (LAG, Leader) -funded The Rural Entrepreneurs’ Wellbeing at Work Development Project gradually evolved into the national Support the Farmer activity and ultimately became part of the Farmers´ Social Insurance Institutions (Mela) statutory Early Support Services.
The article is based on the report From Local Initiative to National Practice, Case: Developing the Wellbeing at Work of Farmers, which analyses the operating model for developing the wellbeing at work of farmers built between 2012 and 2024 through the innovation functions framework of Denning and Dunham [1,2]. The key finding was that the success of the operating model was not based on a single factor but on the ability to identify a genuine need, build trust, and develop a practical network-based way of operating. The results showed that an operating model created at the local level can transform national structures.
Introduction
Agricultural challenges were examined primarily from the perspectives of production, investments and markets, even though at the same time entrepreneurs’ mental burden, loneliness and difficulties in coping with work were increasing. Financial crises, investment pressures, prolonged working days and structural changes in agriculture created a situation in which some farmers were left without anyone with whom they could discuss the overall realities of everyday life. Various wellbeing projects aimed at farmers attempted to address the situation through information events and activities supporting wellbeing and coping. The importance of networks had been also recognized. [3.]
The Rural Entrepreneurs’ Wellbeing at Work Development Project, administered by the Parish of Sastamala and launched in 2012, started from a simple but exceptional idea: the farmer would be encountered as a whole person while stakeholder network cooperation would be developed simultaneously.
The project’s original objective was fairly limited. The aim was to strengthen community spirit and provide events supporting wellbeing at work. Personal discussion support and service guidance were mentioned in the project application, but interviews showed that the original emphasis was on communal events. Practical work quickly demonstrated that the real need concerned personal discussion support and service guidance.
This article examines how a local, Leader-funded, wellbeing project for farmers first grew into a regional activity, then gradually into the national Support the Farmer activity, and ultimately became part of the statutory early support service of the Farmers’ Social Insurance Institution (Mela). At the same time, the article analyses the factors that supported the spread of the operating model.
Data Collection
The research material consisted of project plans (23), final reports (22), other project documents (2), and thematic interviews (5). Documentary material was collected from public sources and directly from the regional unions of Agricultural Producers and Forest Owners (MTK), Mela and individuals previously involved in the projects. Five semi-structured thematic interviews were conducted via Microsoft Teams, recorded and transcribed using automatic transcription.
Innovation Is Not Born from an Idea but from Adoption
In discussions about innovation, attention often focuses on new ideas. In practice, however, most new operating models never spread into permanent use [4]. According to Denning [2,5], innovation is not primarily an invention but the adoption of a new practice within a community. This perspective was well suited to describing the development of wellbeing activities for farmers.
The core of the wellbeing project that originated in Sastamala was a practical operating model: visiting farms, providing confidential discussion support, rapid response, service guidance and developing stakeholder cooperation. In service guidance, special emphasis was placed on directing clients to appropriate services in matters relating to mental health, substance abuse or relationship problems.
The strength of the activity was its ability to address a problem that many recognised but for which nobody had a clear operating model. Based on this case study, holistic encounters distinguished the model from earlier wellbeing projects. The farmer’s situation was not limited to finances, mental health or production; instead, these were viewed simultaneously as interconnected factors. This enabled flexible working methods and made the model easy to adapt.
Trust Determined Adoption
The greatest challenge during the initial phase was building trust. Seeking help carried a strong stigma, and external discussion support was unfamiliar.
Contacts were responded to quickly, meetings were confidential, and employees visited farms when necessary. Referrals could also be made by concerned family members or stakeholder representatives.
A key observation was that stakeholders adopted the operating model faster than farmers. Occupational health services, banks, farm relief services, veterinarians and advisory organisations quickly recognised the need for the service, and the first farmer client contacts were initiated through occupational health referrals.
The Spread of the Operating Model Through Innovation Functions
The development of the wellbeing project can be examined through Denning’s [1,2] innovation functions. In this perspective, innovation is not merely a new idea but the adoption of a new practice within a community.
In this case, the adopted practice consisted of holistic, low-threshold support for the farmer and development of stakeholder networks so that network members learned to know one another and could facilitate service guidance.
1. Sensing: A Local Observation of a Wider Need
The operating model emerged from identifying a need. Through cooperation between the parish and MTK-Vammala, it was recognised that farmers’ burden was not an isolated issue but the combined effect of economic uncertainty, investment pressures, social isolation, heavy workloads and weakened support networks. The project plan did not limit support to specific problems; instead, it was based on encountering the person as a whole. Because the criteria for support were not narrowly defined, the model could adapt to different needs including financial crises, coping challenges, family situations and production-related issues.
Figure 1. The Rural Entrepreneurs’ Wellbeing at Work Development Project identified a range of needs through a practical, hands-on approach.
The need to develop stakeholder cooperation was also widely recognised. The project amendment application expanded the stakeholder network beyond what had been described in the original application, reflecting a more comprehensive understanding of stakeholder cooperation.
Figure 2. The Rural Entrepreneurs’ Wellbeing at Work Development Project identified at an early stage, the need to strengthen the stakeholder network.
2. Envisioning: A Simple but Powerful Promise
Although the vision was not formally documented, interviews showed that it clearly existed in practice. Its core was straightforward: the farmer would receive free, confidential discussion support from someone outside the farm and guidance to appropriate services. In stakeholder work, the vision meant that different actors would recognise one another and know how to direct farmers to appropriate support.
The strength of the vision was its simplicity. It was not utopian or distant but a practical promise: help would be available quickly, nearby and without stigma.
3. Offering: Making the Model Available for Adoption
The local model was shaped so that both farmers and stakeholders could engage with it. Farmers were offered low-threshold discussion support, farm visits and service guidance. Stakeholders were offered a network through which concerning situations could be referred and an opportunity to become familiar with one another.
The model was offered not only to those needing help but also to occupational health services, relief workers, advisory organisations, banks, veterinarians, parishes and MTK actors. Information spread through the network rather than solely through individual client contacts.
4. Executing: Building Trust in Practice
The execution phase demonstrated a genuine need for the service, but adoption required trust. Initially, farmers contacted the service cautiously and many contacts emerged through stakeholder referrals. Practical experiences led to adjustments, such as ensuring that contact with a farmer occurred only with the farmer’s consent.
Trust, voluntariness and rapid response became defining characteristics of the model.
5. Adopting: Visibility, Communication and Evidence-Based Activity
At this stage, the operating model became established. Communication, media attention, stakeholder activity and client work reinforced the perception that this was not an isolated experiment but a necessary service. Communication was carried out through multiple channels, and stakeholders acted as promoters of the activity. Several theses, Master’s thesis, a licentiate thesis and an impact assessment study were produced.
6. Sustaining: The Local Model Became Regional
During the further development phase, the Sastamala model began to spread to other regions of Finland. The first significant step was collaboration with MTK Satakunta’s Extra Energy for Farmers project. In late 2013, the operating model developed through the Rural Entrepreneurs’ Occupational Well-being Development Project in the Sastamala area was expanded to the MTK Satakunta region. In February 2014, the Sastamala Rural Entrepreneurs’ Well-being Project further extended its activities to cover the entire Joutsenten Reitti region.
The maps shown in Figures 3–6 illustrate the spread of the operating model. The areas marked in green represent the Leader project that originated in Sastamala, as well as projects administered by MTK regional unions or implemented in cooperation with them. These projects applied the Sastamala model, providing personal support discussions and developing stakeholder collaboration. The areas marked yellow represent Mela’s Support the Farmer -project. Each map reflects the situation at the end of the year indicated.
Figure 3. Geographic Expansion of the Operating Model in Finland, 2012–2014
Figure 4. Geographic Expansion of the Operating Model in Finland, 2015–2017
As the model continued to develop, each regional project introduced its own emphasis. In some areas, the focus was on financial advisory services; in others, on crisis support, work ability, stakeholder networks, or training activities. Rather than fragmenting the model, these variations strengthened it: the shared core remained intact.
After 2017, no entirely new project operators implementing a similar operating model emerged. The only exception was MTK Pirkanmaa, which had not previously managed its own project. In 2018, after withdrawing from the joint project with MTK Satakunta, MTK Pirkanmaa launched and implemented its own project based on the model.
Figure 6. Geographic Expansion of the Operating Model, 2021–2022
In August 2022, the last farmer well-being project administered by an MTK regional union came to an end, and responsibility for implementing the operating model across Finland was transferred entirely to the Support the Farmer -project operated by Mela. The project continued to operate through annual funding allocations until it became a statutory early support service at the beginning of 2025.
7. Leadership: From Fragmented Projects to a National Whole
As the operating model expanded, the need for a shared leadership and coordination structure emerged. Initially, the projects operated as separate entities, despite ongoing collaboration and information exchange between them. While the projects shared a similar approach to client work and stakeholder network collaboration, each project was managed independently and maintained its own perspective and development priorities.
The need for a national umbrella organization was recognized, with the central union of MTK and Mela identified as the main alternatives. Ultimately, Mela became the key actor responsible for national coordination. The Support the Farmer -project not only provided direct client services and coordinated stakeholder networks in regions without their own regional well-being project but also supported regional projects through various tools and resources. These included service vouchers for farmers facing mental health challenges, the coordination of activities across regions, the organization of joint training events, the production and distribution of materials, and the safeguarding of continuity in client services when regional projects came to an end.
The importance of leadership and coordination was particularly evident in ensuring that the locally developed model did not remain an isolated project experiment. Instead, the initiative evolved into a nationally structured and recognizable operating model.
8. Integration: From Project Activity to a Statutory Service
In Denning’s [1,2] framework, the final stage is the embedding of a new practice into the community. In this case, integration occurred when the operating model became part of Mela’s statutory Early Support Services [6]. Mela began providing these services on 1 January 2025.
The statutory services include guidance and counselling by work ability advisers, service vouchers for mental health expert services, maintenance of the early support model and stakeholder network, training related to supporting work ability, digital services and communications. The local practice was no longer a project, programme or temporary experiment; it became part of a permanent service structure.
Why Did the Operating Model Spread?
Viewed through Denning’s [1,2] innovation functions, the spread of the Sastamala model was not accidental. A genuine need was recognised, a practical vision was formed, the model was offered to farmers and stakeholders, execution confirmed its effectiveness, adoption built trust and visibility, sustaining spread the model to new regions, leadership united fragmented efforts, and integration transformed project activity into a permanent service.
Turning Points
Readiness of Society to Support Solutions
The spread occurred during a period of increasing economic uncertainty, investment pressures and environmental changes in agriculture. A particularly important turning point was the farmers tractor march of 2016, which brought the agricultural crisis into broad public discussion. The resulting funding enabled the launch of Mela’s Support the Farmer project and accelerated nationwide dissemination.
Evidence of Impact Strengthened Credibility
Research, theses, impact evaluations and practical experience gradually strengthened the model’s credibility. Evidence made it easier to justify the activity to decision-makers and funders.
From Agricultural Issues Toward Work Ability Thinking
Over time, the activity increasingly came to be described through concepts such as work ability, early support and prevention. This shift facilitated integration into Mela’s responsibilities and permanent service structures.
A Shared Language Facilitated Adoption
As the activity developed, terminology also evolved. Alongside networking and discussion support for farmers, concepts such as early intervention and discussion model and supporting work ability became common. Widely recognised terminology improved understanding and acceptance across organisations.
Conclusions
This case study demonstrates that a locally recognised service need can gradually evolve into a national operating model and eventually become part of a permanent service structure. The Rural Entrepreneurs’ Wellbeing at Work Development Project launched in Sastamala in 2012 was not the first project promoting farmers’ wellbeing, nor were its individual activities entirely new. What made it exceptional was the combination of confidential discussion support delivered through farm visits and systematic stakeholder network development.
The development of the model also demonstrates the importance of project activities in innovation development. Each regional project contributed new emphases, perspectives and solutions. The model did not spread unchanged but evolved continuously while retaining its core elements: holistic encounters with the farmer, discussion support, service guidance and strengthening stakeholder networks.
Denning’s [1,2] innovation functions framework proved highly suitable for analysing the model’s development. It helped explain how the model progressed from recognising a need, through practical experimentation, to nationwide adoption and ultimately integration into statutory services.
The study further demonstrates that institutionalisation was not the result of a single organisation, project or decision. The development path lasted more than a decade and required the commitment of project actors, employees, farmers, stakeholders, funders, decision-makers and Farmers´ Social Insurance institution.
From a broader societal perspective, the key finding is that significant solutions can emerge at the local level. In challenging societal situations, new operating models are not necessarily found through central planning but through practical experimentation where problems are present. The development path of the Sastamala project demonstrates that a local experiment can grow into a nationally significant operating model when time, cooperation and enabling structures support the dissemination of successful solutions.
Sources:
1. Denning, P.J. & Dunham, R. 2006. Innovation as language action. Communications of the ACM, 49(5), 47-52. https://doi.org/10.1145/1125944.1125974
2. Denning, P.J. 2012. Innovating the future: From ideas to adoption. The Futurist, Jan-Feb, 41-45. https://denninginstitute.com/pjd/PUBS/Futurist-Denning-JF2012.pdf
3. Saha, M. 2014. Maatalousyrittäjien kokemuksia hyvinvointihankkeista. Opinnäytetyö. HAMK. https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2014100114372
4. Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P. & Kyriakidou, O. 2004. Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82(4), 581–629. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.x
5. Denning, P.J. 2004. The social life of innovation. Communications of the ACM, 47(4), 15-19. https://denninginstitute.com/pjd/PUBS/CACMcols/cacmApr04.pdf
6. Maatalousyrittäjän eläkelaki. 1280/2006. 115 a §. Finlex. https://www.finlex.fi/fi/lainsaadanto/2006/1280
Explore the report: From Local-Level Action to Nationwide Operations: A Case Study on Developing the Well-Being at Work of Farmers (fin)