Responsible digital agri‐food innovation in Australian and New Zealand public research organisations

Espig, Martin; Fielke, Simon; Finlay-Smits, Susanna; Jakku, Emma; Turner, James A.; Robinson, Catherine J.; Hunter, Caroline; Lacey, Justine

doi:10.1111/soru.12370

Cited by 20 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 89 publications

(169 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reflection in scientific research and technology development enables the R&D professionals to revisit the values and norms underpinning their own assumptions and decisions (Espig et al., 2022; Stilgoe et al., 2013). In effect, it also allows R&D professionals to scrutinize their own work with a broader range of stakeholder inputs (Owen et al., 2013).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the interconnected nature of risk and responsibility in the research and development of new and emerging technologies

Malakar,

Lacey

2023

Risk Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk analysis of new and emerging technologies requires innovative approaches that are agile, exploratory, and can accommodate broad stakeholder engagement and perspectives. Existing theories of risk governance and responsible innovation suggest that operationalizing guiding principles for engagement such as inclusion and reflection may provide a useful approach to the risk analysis of these technologies. Yet, methodologies to systematically assess how we might operationalize such guiding principles in risk analysis are limited in existing risk research. We contribute to filling this gap by demonstrating a practical methodology for examining and documenting how research and development (R&D) professionals operationalize inclusion and reflection in risk analysis and what value this provides to risk analysis in the R&D context. We use the Australian nanotechnology R&D sector as our case study, interviewing 28 experts to examine how R&D professionals have operationalized inclusion and reflection into their risk analysis practices, generating three findings. First, we describe how our research design enables the successful translation of theory into a methodology that supports an empirical assessment of the integration of these guiding principles into risk analysis practice. Second, we argue that successfully and systematically integrating inclusion and reflection in risk analysis fosters a wider understanding and identification of risk through the activation of multi‐actor and multi‐institutional stakeholder engagement processes. Third, we outline how this research depicts the outward‐facing and introspective nature of risk analysis.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the interconnected nature of risk and responsibility in the research and development of new and emerging technologies

Malakar,

Lacey

2023

Risk Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They note the opportunities for rurally located social science expertise to help determine the impact-in various forms-of technologies to qualitatively improve meaningful delivery of research, development and innovation processes. Espig et al (2022) highlight the challenge of operationalising the concept of RI into research institutions in Australia and New Zealand. While they outline many challenges, there is hope that helping other researchers and developers see the value of RI processes can allow them to alter their practice in ways that might support socially beneficial outcomes or avoid societal ills.…”

Section: Social Scientific Imagination and Practice As An Investment ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A call to expand disciplinary boundaries so that social scientific imagination and practice are central to quests for ‘responsible’ digital agri‐food innovation

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A call to expand disciplinary boundaries so that social scientific imagination and practice are central to quests for 'responsible' digital agri-food innovation INTRODUCTIONThe current venture capital investment model and associated start-up cultures require utmost positivity in technological investment, with 'success breeds success' being a common mantra in relation to university-industry partnerships (Santoro, 2000). Such approaches within the 'agtech' community result in existential challenges for those of us who are tasked by our disciplinary training to espouse more balanced and critical perspectives. The specific aim of this special issue (SI) is to advance the scholarly understanding of a concept called responsible innovation (RI), as it applies to the sociotechnical transition processes of digitalisation within the domain of agri-food industries. This aim is built on a base of many intellectual endeavours that have come before, some of the most notable and timely including:

show abstract

“…Rural areas often lag behind when it comes to the infrastructure required for digital solutions. Current research on rural digital innovation tend to focus on the ‘fourth agricultural revolution’ (Barrett & Rose, 2022), agro‐food systems (Rotz et al., 2019), tools for responsible and efficient digital farming (Charatsari et al., 2022; Espig et al., 2022; Søraa & Vik, 2021) and the underlying political and policy debates. Thereby, only a few studies put emphasis on co‐creation and network effects (see Lioutas & Charatsari, 2022).…”

Section: Exploring the Dynamics Of Digital Innovation In Rural Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hacking Hekla: Exploring the dynamics of digital innovation in rural areas

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores innovation initiatives in rural communities in Iceland conveyed through the implementation and perceived outcomes of the hackathon Hacking Hekla. Digitalisation is often proposed as a new, all‐purpose tool for regional development that responds to rural challenges innovatively. However, the digital role is often less clear when examining finer development practices. Hackathons are frequently applied to achieve instant economic and societal change. Through the example of Hacking Hekla, we research the challenges and outcomes of creative interventions and critically explore the value of innovation and digitalisation in the context of rural development in Iceland. Based on action research, we use the hackathon as a tool for knowledge generation and intervention in regional policy discourse with the intention to foster applied digital innovation. Data were collected using qualitative semi‐structured interviews. The study demonstrates a gap between regional policies emphasising digital innovation and innovation practices on the ground and argues that fostering digital innovation in rural communities is a complex process that could demonstrate effects only in the long term.

show abstract

Responsible digital agri‐food innovation in Australian and New Zealand public research organisations

Cited by 20 publications

References 89 publications

On the interconnected nature of risk and responsibility in the research and development of new and emerging technologies

On the interconnected nature of risk and responsibility in the research and development of new and emerging technologies

A call to expand disciplinary boundaries so that social scientific imagination and practice are central to quests for ‘responsible’ digital agri‐food innovation

Hacking Hekla: Exploring the dynamics of digital innovation in rural areas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About