Genealogy of design reasoning in agronomy: Lessons for supporting the design of agricultural systems

Salembier, Chloé; Segrestin, Blanche; Berthet, Elsa; Weil, Benoît; Meynard, Jean-Marc

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2018.05.005

Cited by 41 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Scientific evidence supporting the decision for continuing or discarding a certain practice was therefore not always established. Salembier et al (2018) recognize this dilemma in co-design processes and distinguish between “scientific knowledge production” and the “use of knowledge in a design process”, which both follow different rules. Knowledge generated during the co-design process often served to broaden explorations, and to stimulate the design by other stakeholders than researchers (cf.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Knowledge generated during the co-design process often served to broaden explorations, and to stimulate the design by other stakeholders than researchers (cf. Bos et al, 2009; Salembier et al, 2018). Furthermore, even those treatments that could be compared over multiple seasons and sites showed a large variation in yield (in line with earlier findings on farmers' fields of Franke et al, 2016; Kraaijvanger et al, 2016; Ronner et al, 2018a).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Biggs, 1990; Sumberg et al, 2003). The joint discussions widened the range of options compared with what farmers or researchers could have achieved alone (Bos et al, 2009; Meynard et al, 2012; Salembier et al, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The “transfer of technologies” paradigm evolved into an interactive and participative paradigm, whereby farmers are not simply considered receivers of technologies through researchers, but as partners in the design of new technologies (Almekinders and Hardon, 2006; Defoer, 2002; Klerkx et al, 2012). Moreover, farmers are increasingly recognized as designers of their own production systems (Prost et al, 2018; Salembier et al, 2018), whereby the role of agricultural researchers changes into supporting farmers' design and experimentation (Kraaijvanger et al, 2016; Le Gal et al, 2011; Prost et al, 2018). Adaptive and iterative approaches are advocated, which not only focus on the development of new technologies (Prost et al, 2018), but also include their implementation to better evaluate technology relevance and re-design when necessary (Martin et al, 2013; Meynard et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Co-design of improved climbing bean production practices for smallholder farmers in the highlands of Uganda

Ronner

Descheemaeker

Almekinders

et al. 2019

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluated the usefulness of a co-design process to generate a relevant basket of options for climbing bean cultivation in the context of a large-scale project. The aim was to identify a range of options sufficiently diverse to be of interest for farmers of widely-different resource endowment. The co-design process consisted of three cycles of demonstration, evaluation and re-design in the eastern and southwestern highlands of Uganda in 2014–2015. Evaluations aimed to distinguish preferences of farmers between the two areas, and among farmers of different gender and socio-economic backgrounds. Farmers, researchers, extension officers and NGO staff re-designed treatments for demonstrations in the next season. Climbing bean yields and evaluation scores varied between seasons and sites. Evaluation scores were not always in line with yields, revealing that farmers used multiple evaluation criteria next to yield, such as marketability of varieties, availability of inputs and ease of staking methods. The co-design process enriched the basket of options, improved the relevance of options demonstrated and enhanced the understanding of preferences of a diversity of users. Developing options for resource-poor farmers was difficult, however, because they face multiple constraints. The basket of options developed in this study can be applied across the East-African highlands, with an ‘option-by-context’ matrix as a starting point for out-scaling. The study also showed, however, that consistent recommendations about the suitability of technologies for different types of farmers were hard to identify. This highlights the importance of a basket of options with flexible combinations of practices rather than developing narrowly specified technology packages for static farm types.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Co-design of improved climbing bean production practices for smallholder farmers in the highlands of Uganda

Ronner

Descheemaeker

Almekinders

et al. 2019

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, biodiversity-based agrosystems call for an exploration of a wide range of concepts and solutions (Salembier et al 2018). Overlooked until recently, ecological interactions offer new lines of action for crop health and productivity management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Codesigning biodiversity-based agrosystems promotes alternatives to mycorrhizal inoculants

Chave

Angeon²,

Paut

et al. 2019

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Facing the challenge of the ecological transition of agriculture, biodiversity opens new avenues to enhance ecological interactions and reduce chemical input dependency. Designing biodiversity-based agrosystems requires an agroecological approach that combines key principles: exploring a wide range of concepts and solutions, adopting systemic reasoning, implementing a sitespecific approach, developing an action-oriented process, and maintaining a continuous improvement dynamic. This type of approach has never been developed to harness mycorrhizal fungi, which are key components of soil biodiversity, because their beneficial action on crops depends on complex and underexploited ecological interactions. At present, mycorrhizae are mainly used through industrial inoculants that fit within the productionist paradigm. To shift toward agroecological approaches, we implemented a methodological framework conceived to better address the design of mycorrhiza-friendly cropping systems by sharing knowledge with farmers in four different study areas (Provence, French Guiana, Guadeloupe, and Martinique). This framework includes participative workshops, a board game, and prospective exercises to collect farmers' proposals and the factors that prevent from implementing mycorrhiza-friendly cropping systems. We showed that 90% of the farmers proposed alternatives to industrial inoculants, 50% of them adopted systemic reasoning by combining these alternative proposals. Most farmers understood that they were all potential "mycorrhizae producers". We showed, for the first time through on-farm experiments that valorization of indigenous mycorrhizal fungi strains using a donor plant is an effective practice to increase root colonization before planting (up to a frequency of 95% and an intensity of 32%). Considering the increasing supply of mycorrhizal inoculants and despite the uncertainty of related knowledge, we codesigned innovative practices. Learning communities (technical advisors, high school teachers, etc.) assumed responsibility for continuous improvement in knowledge and practices. Finally, beyond the issue of mycorrhizae, we showed that an agroecological approach could bring stakeholders one step further into the design of biodiversity-based agrosystems.

show abstract

Evaluation and Indicators in the Design of Agroecosystems

Tittonell

2023

A Systems Approach to Agroecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genealogy of design reasoning in agronomy: Lessons for supporting the design of agricultural systems

Cited by 41 publications

References 79 publications

Co-design of improved climbing bean production practices for smallholder farmers in the highlands of Uganda

Co-design of improved climbing bean production practices for smallholder farmers in the highlands of Uganda

Codesigning biodiversity-based agrosystems promotes alternatives to mycorrhizal inoculants

Evaluation and Indicators in the Design of Agroecosystems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About