“If they don’t tell us what they do with it, why would we trust them?” Trust, transparency and benefit-sharing in Smart Farming

Jakku, Emma; Taylor, Bruce; Fleming, Aysha; Mason, Claire M.; Fielke, Simon; Sounness, Chris; Thorburn, Peter J.

doi:10.1016/j.njas.2018.11.002

Cited by 134 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

118

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…29 and equity (who benefits from access to and use of farmers' data?). 17,30 Exacerbating the lack of trust is a sense that political and legal control of big data is lagging behind technical developments, 31 with the perceived risk that control of data will reside with technology providers, rather than farmers as technology users. This raises questions regarding data governance, while simultaneously enabling integration of data to provide actionable knowledge.…”

Section: Data Ownership Use and Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

Priorities for science to overcome hurdles thwarting the full promise of the ‘digital agriculture’ revolution

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The world needs to produce more food, more sustainably, on a planet with scarce resources and under changing climate. The advancement of technologies, computing power and analytics offers the possibility that 'digitalisation of agriculture' can provide new solutions to these complex challenges. The role of science is to evidence and support the design and use of digital technologies to realise these beneficial outcomes and avoid unintended consequences. This requires consideration of data governance design to enable the benefits of digital agriculture to be shared equitably and how digital agriculture could change agricultural business models; that is, farm structures, the value chain and stakeholder roles, networks and power relations, and governance. We argue that this requires transdisciplinary research (at pace), including explicit consideration of the aforementioned socio-ethical issues, data governance and business models, alongside addressing technical issues, as we now have to simultaneously deal with multiple interacting outcomes in complex technical, social, economic and governance systems. The exciting prospect is that digitalisation of science can enable this new, and more effective, way of working. The question then becomes: how can we effectively accelerate this shift to a new way of working in agricultural science? As well as identifying key research areas, we suggest organisational changes will be required: new research business models, agile project management; new skills and capabilities; and collaborations with new partners to develop 'technology ecosystems'. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

show abstract

Section: Data Ownership Use and Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

Priorities for science to overcome hurdles thwarting the full promise of the ‘digital agriculture’ revolution

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, our study highlighted the potential impact of negative experiences associated with new technologies from farmers who struggle with the adaptation process as such occurrences may act to stall the uptake of smart farming technologies. If public policy organizations are to realize the desired impacts of smart farming technology, there needs to be greater focus on understanding where (and which) technologies can have an actual impact on farm (Shepherd et al, 2018), as opposed to technologies that only create greater farmer distrust and uncertainty (Jakku et al, 2018;Klerkx et al, 2019).…”

Section: Implications For Minimizing Uncertainty Related To Smart Tecmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation Uncertainty Impacts the Adoption of Smarter Farming Approaches

Eastwood

Renwick

2020

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One possible way to avoid this loss of credibility in the case of The Maladaptation Game could be to introduce the player's context, such as specific geographic settings or farm types, to a greater extent. More recently, studies on digital tools and interactive technologies for farming systems -albeit not for gaming -highlight issues of trust, transparency and dialogue [Jakku et al, 2019;Lazzaro et al, 2018]. Based on a study of the interplay between mistrust and insufficient information in the maize credit system, Agyekumhene et al [2018] hold that effective intermediation arrangements are not quick fixes but processes of trial and error, and learning by doing.…”

Section: Conceptual Thinking In Game Design and Everyday Experiences mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They also conclude that meaning is provided in the continuous and iterative participation of the stakeholder community, involving domain experts, advisers and practitioners. Along this line, studies have particularly emphasized scepticism towards digital tools due to a lack of transparency [Jakku et al, 2019] and the perceived lack of usable and accessible farm-level information [Knierim et al, 2018] as important aspects of these trust-building processes.…”

Section: Conceptual Thinking In Game Design and Everyday Experiences mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, as the use of digital tools and interactive technologies for farming systems has increased rapidly in recent years, this motivates studies concerning trust, transparency and dialogue [Jakku et al, 2019;Lazzaro et al, 2018]. By analysing players' discussions while playing The Maladaptation Game, this paper aims to explore how players perceive the credibility of game-mediated research on climate change maladaptation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Credibility aspects of research-based gaming in science communication — the case of The Maladaptation Game

Asplund¹

2020

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While previous studies have found games and gaming to be a new and innovative communication strategy to inform the public and citizens about scientific research and engage them with it, this article addresses the under-researched question of credibility aspects in research-based gaming. The study analyses agricultural stakeholders' discussions on the credibility of scientific descriptions in The Maladaptation Game — a game based on research on climate change maladaptation in Nordic agriculture. The analysis of focus group transcripts and frame credibility finds that players attribute credibility to 1) the perceived correspondence between game-articulated information on climate change, suggested adaptation actions and their potential maladaptive outcome, 2) the perceived “fit” between these elements and players' experiences, and 3) the information sources underpinning the game. Lastly, the article discusses the role of research-based games in science communication and advocates the need for careful balance between models of conceptual and scientific thinking in game design and everyday experiences among players.

show abstract

“If they don’t tell us what they do with it, why would we trust them?” Trust, transparency and benefit-sharing in Smart Farming

Cited by 134 publications

References 45 publications

Priorities for science to overcome hurdles thwarting the full promise of the ‘digital agriculture’ revolution

Priorities for science to overcome hurdles thwarting the full promise of the ‘digital agriculture’ revolution

Innovation Uncertainty Impacts the Adoption of Smarter Farming Approaches

Credibility aspects of research-based gaming in science communication — the case of The Maladaptation Game

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About