Design process outputs as boundary objects in agricultural innovation projects: Functions and limitations

Klerkx, Laurens; Bommel, Séverine van; Bos, A.P.; Holster, H.C.; Zwartkruis, J.V.; Aarts, Noelle

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2012.07.006

Cited by 85 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such models function as shared boundary objects (Jakku and Thorburn, 2010;Klerkx et al, 2012) that help participants to understand the complexity and dynamics of the system that was leading to the problem, and consequently design more suitable solutions.…”

Section: Types Of Transformative Actionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generating transformative agency among horticultural producers: An activity-theoretical approach to transforming Integrated Pest Management

Vänninen

Querol

Engeström

2015

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Types Of Transformative Actionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generating transformative agency among horticultural producers: An activity-theoretical approach to transforming Integrated Pest Management

Vänninen

Querol

Engeström

2015

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We suggest, however, that in addition the frame of responsible innovation needs to be broadened. The fourth agricultural revolution is associated with many innovations in sustainable agriculture, some emerging and some more established, which are interacting and co-evolving in a wider "ecology of innovation"; or, as Klerkx et al (2012) argue, throughout "agricultural innovation systems" in which many different actors (e.g., farmers, advisors) are influential. Such an ecology of innovation includes "big" emerging smart technologies (e.g., AI, Internet of Things, Cloud Computing, robotics), as well as "smaller" farmer and/or community-led innovations (Waters-Bayer et al, 2015; e.g., Tambo and Wünscher, 2017) through to more mundane or lowtech sustainable agriculture solutions (e.g., Kerr, 2015).…”

Section: Responsible Innovation Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agriculture 4.0: Broadening Responsible Innovation in an Era of Smart Farming

Rose

Chilvers

2018

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

432

273

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agriculture is undergoing a new technology revolution supported by policy-makers around the world. While smart technologies, such as Artificial Intelligence, robotics, and the Internet of Things, could play an important role in achieving enhanced productivity and greater eco-efficiency, critics have suggested that the consideration of social implications is being side-lined. Research illustrates that some agricultural practitioners are concerned about using certain smart technologies. Indeed, some studies argue that agricultural societies may be changed, or "re-scripted," in undesirable ways, and there is precedent to suggest that wider society may be concerned about radical new agricultural technologies. We therefore encourage policy-makers, funders, technology companies, and researchers to consider the views of both farming communities and wider society. In agriculture, the concept of responsible innovation has not been widely considered, although two recent papers have made useful suggestions. We build on these interventions by arguing that key dimensions of responsible innovation-anticipation, inclusion, reflexivity, and responsiveness-should be applied to this fourth agricultural revolution. We argue, however, that ideas of responsible innovation should be further developed in order to make them relevant and robust for emergent agri-tech, and that frameworks should be tested in practice to see if they can actively shape innovation trajectories. In making suggestions on how to construct a more comprehensive framework for responsible innovation in sustainable agriculture, we call for: (i) a more systemic approach that maps and attends to the wider ecology of innovations associated with this fourth agricultural revolution; (ii) a broadening of notions of "inclusion" in responsible innovation to account better for diverse and already existing spaces of participation in agri-tech, and (iii) greater testing of frameworks in practice to see if they are capable of making innovation processes more socially responsible. Some would argue that the "fourth agricultural revolution" (Lejon and Frankelius, 2015) or "agriculture 4.0" (Bartmer in Frankelius et al., 2017) has already begun. Each previous agricultural revolution was radical at the time-the first representing a transition from hunting and gathering to settled agriculture, the second relating to the British agricultural revolution in the 18th century, and the third relating to post-war productivity increases associated with mechanization and the Green Revolution in the developing world. While technological innovation is thus not new

show abstract

“…), to GIS technology (Harvey and Chrisman ), food labels (Eden ), agricultural innovation (Goldberger ; Klerkx et al . ; Tisenkopfs et al . ), and rural development (Vik and Villa ).…”

Section: Boundary Objects Boundary Organisations and The Triple Helmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Emergence, Articulation and Negotiation of a New Food Industry Initiative in Rural Australia: Boundary Object, Organisation or Triple Helix Model?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports on research to track and trace the development and diffusion of a new initiative for clustering a diverse range of agro-food businesses located in the rural state of Tasmania, Australia. The initiative is termed 'FermenTasmania'. To structure our analysis, our research team leveraged the concepts of boundary objects and organisations, and the Triple Helix model of innovation; testing these sociological concepts and model as a means to explain the nature, structure and emerging trajectory of FermenTasmania. This paper aims to contribute two distinct, but related findings: first, analysis of the fit and utility of the aforementioned concepts and model to track the emergence of FermenTasmania; and, second, assessment of the dynamics of innovation regarding the formation of this new social entity bridging agriculture and tourism in a rural area, with particular attention to the role of place.

show abstract

Design process outputs as boundary objects in agricultural innovation projects: Functions and limitations

Cited by 85 publications

References 51 publications

Generating transformative agency among horticultural producers: An activity-theoretical approach to transforming Integrated Pest Management

Generating transformative agency among horticultural producers: An activity-theoretical approach to transforming Integrated Pest Management

Agriculture 4.0: Broadening Responsible Innovation in an Era of Smart Farming

The Emergence, Articulation and Negotiation of a New Food Industry Initiative in Rural Australia: Boundary Object, Organisation or Triple Helix Model?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About