IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cse/wpaper/2009-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Conceptual Framework for Guiding the Participatory Development of Agricultural Decision Support Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Emma Jakku
  • Peter Thorburn

    (CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Australia)

Abstract

Scientists develop decision support systems (DSSs) to make agricultural science more accessible for farmers and extension officers. Despite the growing use of participatory approaches in agricultural DSS development, reflection on this endeavour is largely focused on the ‘doing’ of participation or the ‘problem of implementation’, with little reference to relevant theoretical approaches within the field of science and technology studies (STS). However, if DSS development is to reach its full potential, a more conceptually informed understanding of how stakeholders collaborate in the participatory development of DSSs is required. To contribute to this gap, we developed a conceptual framework based on three concepts drawn from STS that can add value to understanding agricultural DSSs: interpretative flexibility, technological frames, and boundary objects. A DSS becomes a boundary object when it enables the various parties involved in its development to collaborate and learn together despite diverse perceptions of the DSS or the issues that the DSS is being used to address. When combined, these three concepts highlight the importance of social learning for participatory DSS development, particularly the need to begin by exploring the parties’ different perspectives and facilitating co-learning. Our framework leads to a re-definition of success for participatory DSS development, by identifying social learning as a valuable outcome that can occur when farmers, extension officers and scientists collaborate. A case study of stakeholder collaboration to develop an irrigation scheduling DSS for the Australian sugarcane industry is used to illustrate the analytical strength of this conceptual framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Emma Jakku & Peter Thorburn, 2009. "A Conceptual Framework for Guiding the Participatory Development of Agricultural Decision Support Systems," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-12, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
  • Handle: RePEc:cse:wpaper:2009-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.csiro.au/files/files/ptgm.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gibbons, James M. & Sparkes, Debbie L. & Wilson, Paul & Ramsden, Stephen J., 2005. "Modelling optimal strategies for decreasing nitrate loss with variation in weather - a farm-level approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 113-134, February.
    2. J Murdoch, 1995. "Actor-Networks and the Evolution of Economic Forms: Combining Description and Explanation in Theories of Regulation, Flexible Specialization, and Networks," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 27(5), pages 731-757, May.
    3. Hearn, A. B. & Bange, M. P., 2002. "SIRATAC and CottonLOGIC: persevering with DSSs in the Australian cotton industry," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 27-56, October.
    4. M. Muro & P. Jeffrey, 2008. "A critical review of the theory and application of social learning in participatory natural resource management processes," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(3), pages 325-344.
    5. Murray Bruges & Willie Smith, 2008. "Participatory approaches for sustainable agriculture: A contradiction in terms?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(1), pages 13-23, January.
    6. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    7. Volker Hoffmann & Kirsten Probst & Anja Christinck, 2007. "Farmers and researchers: How can collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology development?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 24(3), pages 355-368, September.
    8. Nelson, R. A. & Holzworth, D. P. & Hammer, G. L. & Hayman, P. T., 2002. "Infusing the use of seasonal climate forecasting into crop management practice in North East Australia using discussion support software," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 393-414, December.
    9. Walker, Daniel H., 2002. "Decision support, learning and rural resource management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 113-127, July.
    10. Carberry, P. S. & Hochman, Z. & McCown, R. L. & Dalgliesh, N. P. & Foale, M. A. & Poulton, P. L. & Hargreaves, J. N. G. & Hargreaves, D. M. G. & Cawthray, S. & Hillcoat, N. & Robertson, M. J., 2002. "The FARMSCAPE approach to decision support: farmers', advisers', researchers' monitoring, simulation, communication and performance evaluation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 141-177, October.
    11. Vaughan Higgins, 2006. "Re-Figuring the Problem of Farmer Agency in Agri-Food Studies: A Translation Approach," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 23(1), pages 51-62, March.
    12. Cornwall, Andrea & Jewkes, Rachel, 1995. "What is participatory research?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 41(12), pages 1667-1676, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jakku, E. & Thorburn, P.J., 2010. "A conceptual framework for guiding the participatory development of agricultural decision support systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 675-682, November.
    2. Hochman, Z. & Carberry, P.S., 2011. "Emerging consensus on desirable characteristics of tools to support farmers' management of climate risk in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(6), pages 441-450, July.
    3. Le Gal, P.-Y. & Dugué, P. & Faure, G. & Novak, S., 2011. "How does research address the design of innovative agricultural production systems at the farm level? A review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(9), pages 714-728.
    4. Sterk, B. & van Ittersum, M.K. & Leeuwis, C. & Rossing, W.A.H. & van Keulen, H. & van de Ven, G.W.J., 2006. "Finding niches for whole-farm design models - contradictio in terminis?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 211-228, February.
    5. Thysen, Iver & Detlefsen, Nina K., 2006. "Online decision support for irrigation for farmers," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 269-276, December.
    6. Andreas Neef & Dieter Neubert, 2011. "Stakeholder participation in agricultural research projects: a conceptual framework for reflection and decision-making," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(2), pages 179-194, June.
    7. McCown, R. L. & Hochman, Z. & Carberry, P. S., 2002. "Probing the enigma of the decision support system for farmers: Learning from experience and from theory," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 1-10, October.
    8. Chatelin, M. H. & Aubry, C. & Poussin, J. C. & Meynard, J. M. & Masse, J. & Verjux, N. & Gate, Ph. & Le Bris, X., 2005. "DeciBle, a software package for wheat crop management simulation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 77-99, January.
    9. Rossing, Walter A.H. & Albicette, Maria Marta & Aguerre, Veronica & Leoni, Carolina & Ruggia, Andrea & Dogliotti, Santiago, 2021. "Crafting actionable knowledge on ecological intensification: Lessons from co-innovation approaches in Uruguay and Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    10. Vayssières, Jonathan & Bocquier, François & Lecomte, Philippe, 2009. "GAMEDE: A global activity model for evaluating the sustainability of dairy enterprises. Part II - Interactive simulation of various management strategies with diverse stakeholders," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 139-151, July.
    11. Phelan, David C. & Harrison, Matthew T. & McLean, Greg & Cox, Howard & Pembleton, Kieth G. & Dean, Geoff J. & Parsons, David & do Amaral Richter, Maria E. & Pengilley, Georgie & Hinton, Sue J. & Moham, 2018. "Advancing a farmer decision support tool for agronomic decisions on rainfed and irrigated wheat cropping in Tasmania," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 113-124.
    12. Fountas, S. & Wulfsohn, D. & Blackmore, B.S. & Jacobsen, H.L. & Pedersen, S.M., 2006. "A model of decision-making and information flows for information-intensive agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 192-210, February.
    13. Lundström, Christina & Lindblom, Jessica, 2018. "Considering farmers' situated knowledge of using agricultural decision support systems (AgriDSS) to Foster farming practices: The case of CropSAT," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 9-20.
    14. Harvey James & Iddisah Sulemana, 2014. "Case studies on smallholder farmer voice: an introduction to a special symposium," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(4), pages 637-641, December.
    15. Nguyen, Nam C. & Wegener, Malcolm K. & Russell, Iean W., 2007. "Decision support systems in Australian agriculture: state of the art and future development," AFBM Journal, Australasian Farm Business Management Network, vol. 4(1-2), pages 1-7.
    16. Dick, Jan & Turkelboom, Francis & Woods, Helen & Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Bezák, Peter & Mederly, Peter & Leone, Michael & Verheyden, Wim & Kelemen, Eszter & H, 2018. "Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 552-565.
    17. Vayssières, Jonathan & Vigne, Mathieu & Alary, Véronique & Lecomte, Philippe, 2011. "Integrated participatory modelling of actual farms to support policy making on sustainable intensification," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 146-161, February.
    18. Dolinska, Aleksandra, 2017. "Bringing farmers into the game. Strengthening farmers' role in the innovation process through a simulation game, a case from Tunisia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 129-139.
    19. Kragt, Marit Ellen & Llewellyn, Rick S., 2013. "Using choice experiments to improve the design of weed decision support tools," Working Papers 147031, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    20. Elena Pagliarino & Secondo Rolfo, 2021. "Examining Researchers’ Attitudes, Barriers, and Opportunities for Participatory Research: The Case of the Riso-Biosystems Project on Organic Rice," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-24, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social learning; interpretative flexibility; technological frames; boundary objects; irrigation; climate variability;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cse:wpaper:2009-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CSE-Webrequest (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/secsiau.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.