Agricultural Technologies as Living Machines: Toward a Biomimetic Conceptualization of Smart Farming Technologies

Blok, Vincent; Gremmen, Bart

doi:10.1080/21550085.2018.1509491

Cited by 43 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Conceptual approaches delve deeper into possible opportunities and challenges of PLF with regard to relationship issues (33,34) and its embeddedness in nature (35). Bos et al (33) investigate the link between PLF and a further objectification of animals in intensive livestock production.…”

Section: Plf Technologies: Key To Tackle Concerns or Poser Of Intrinsic Objections?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Smart Technologies Lead to Smart Answers? On the Claim of Smart Sensing Technologies to Tackle Animal Related Societal Concerns in Europe Over Current Pig Husbandry Systems

Giersberg

Meijboom

2021

Front. Vet. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current pig production systems in Europe are subject to public criticism. At the same time, Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) technologies, which allow for automated animal monitoring are entering commercial pig farms. With their claim of improving animal health and welfare, these innovations may respond to public concerns. However, they may raise problems of societal acceptance themselves. In this review, we investigate whether the available literature allows for an analysis to which extent PLF can mitigate or reinforce societal concerns related to pig production. We first analyze papers on pig husbandry systems in general, and then those on PLF as an innovation in animal production. In general, there is a tension between citizens and farmers. Citizens hold rather negative attitudes whereas farmers evaluate pig production more positively. Literature on attitudes of other actors, such as veterinarians, is missing. Information on the attitudes toward PLF of stakeholders other than farmers is lacking. Possible challenges of societal acceptance of PLF and chances to overcome these are only discussed in theoretical approaches. We conclude that to analyze the role of PLF in addressing societal concerns over pig production, there is a need for further empirical research including attention to underlying values of all stakeholders. This should focus on the attitudes of the currently missing stakeholders toward pig husbandry in general, and on those of the wider society toward PLF. Only by means of additional data, it will be possible to evaluate whether PLF has the potential to address societal concerns related to pig production.

show abstract

Section: Plf Technologies: Key To Tackle Concerns or Poser Of Intrinsic Objections?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Smart Technologies Lead to Smart Answers? On the Claim of Smart Sensing Technologies to Tackle Animal Related Societal Concerns in Europe Over Current Pig Husbandry Systems

Giersberg

Meijboom

2021

Front. Vet. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Critics fear that such large integrated systems will come at the expense of the autonomy of farmers, who are reduced more and more to small elements in a big digital agricultural production machine (Clapp and Ruder 2020). Other concerns involve the alienation between farmers and their animals (Blok and Gremmen 2018) and an increased industrialization of agriculture at the expense of agroecological practices (Rotz et al 2019).…”

Section: Digitalization Of Agriculturementioning

confidence: 99%

Inclusion and Resilience in the Bioeconomy

Asveld

2021

Bio#Futures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New technological developments such as CRISPR-Cas, advanced genetic sequencing and the digitalization of agriculture offer promising prospects to realize the potential of a sustainable bioeconomy. At the same time, enormous challenges abound such as the pressure on biodiversity and the associated risk of pandemics, climate change and the ever-increasing global economic inequality. The bioeconomy can play a beneficial role in this; however, this will only be possible if the bioeconomy is developed on the basis of inclusion. In this chapter I will explain the relevance of inclusion for the bioeconomy and describe some of the sociotechnical developments where inclusion should be realized in order to build a resilient and sustainable bioeconomy. These developments include biosphere capacity, global biobased value chains, digital genetic resources and the digitalization of agriculture. I will conclude with the question of who bears responsibility for an inclusive bioeconomy.

show abstract

“…A growing body of social research has begun to examine the experiences of farmers with "smart farm" IoT technologies, thus moving beyond the urban context that has preoccupied many studies thus far (Blok & Gremmen, 2018;Eastwood, Klerkx, Ayre, & Dela Rue, 2019;Klerkx, Jakku, & Labarthe, 2019;Rotz et al, 2019). One example is a project based on New Zealand (Eastwood et al, 2019), including interviews with stakeholders involved with smart dairy farming technologies.…”

Section: Lived Experiencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Smart farming devices include the deployment of devices such as sensors used to monitor soil, farm animals, water, and plants, with the intention of gathering detailed data to improve the efficiency, productivity, animal welfare, and environmental sustainability of farms and reduce pollution and overuse of pesticides and fertilisers. A growing body of social research has begun to examine the experiences of farmers with “smart farm” IoT technologies, thus moving beyond the urban context that has preoccupied many studies thus far (Blok & Gremmen, ; Eastwood, Klerkx, Ayre, & Dela Rue, ; Klerkx, Jakku, & Labarthe, ; Rotz et al, ). One example is a project based on New Zealand (Eastwood et al, ), including interviews with stakeholders involved with smart dairy farming technologies.…”

Section: Lived Experiencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Internet of Things: Social dimensions

Lupton

2020

Sociology Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Internet of Things (IoT) is a vast, dispersed system in which a diverse array of objects, humans, and other living things is connected via “smart” technologies and the Internet. In this article, I present a thematic review of the literature that focuses on the social dimensions of the IoT. Drawing on research published in sociology, anthropology, cultural geography, critical urban studies, science and technology studies, environmental studies, and human–computer interaction studies and design, I outline key conceptual approaches and then discuss four major themes emerging across these dispersed but cognate literatures: (a) techno‐utopian imaginaries, (b) risks and harms, (c) lived experiences, and (d) interventions into futures. As I show, to date, most of the social research literature has focused on the topics of smart cities and smart homes in the context of the Global North. Some researchers have begun to employ innovative methods to generate new and alternative ways of imagining IoT technologies. The article concludes with proposing directions for future research. These include directing more attention to publics' role in intervening in the futures of IoT, to applications of smart technologies beyond the smart city and home, and the IoT in the context of the Global South.

show abstract

Agricultural Technologies as Living Machines: Toward a Biomimetic Conceptualization of Smart Farming Technologies

Cited by 43 publications

References 30 publications

Smart Technologies Lead to Smart Answers? On the Claim of Smart Sensing Technologies to Tackle Animal Related Societal Concerns in Europe Over Current Pig Husbandry Systems

Smart Technologies Lead to Smart Answers? On the Claim of Smart Sensing Technologies to Tackle Animal Related Societal Concerns in Europe Over Current Pig Husbandry Systems

Inclusion and Resilience in the Bioeconomy

The Internet of Things: Social dimensions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About