IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v113y2012icp39-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design process outputs as boundary objects in agricultural innovation projects: Functions and limitations

Author

Listed:
  • Klerkx, Laurens
  • van Bommel, Severine
  • Bos, Bram
  • Holster, Henri
  • Zwartkruis, Joyce V.
  • Aarts, Noelle

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to investigate the functions of design process outputs (such as design briefs, scale models, visualizations, animations) as boundary objects in the implementation of novel agricultural production system concepts. The case study analysis of the innovation process that led to the establishment of the Rondeel poultry husbandry system reveals that the interpretative flexibility of design process outputs as boundary objects helps in creating mutual understanding among diverse actors involved in the implementation of a novel agricultural production system concept, and in mobilizing support for it. In some cases, boundary objects allow for interpretative flexibility but remain stable in shape; sometimes, however, the boundary objects themselves change as a result of the redesign process they induce. Furthermore, implementers of novel systems may prefer to maintain a rigid interpretation of the boundary object, using such interpretative rigidity of the boundary object as both an inclusion and exclusion mechanism for actors and options in the innovation process. The results confirm that a design process output such as a scale model can be purposefully created to serve as a boundary object and support novel agricultural system concept implementation. However, the effectiveness of a boundary object cannot be predicted and fully planned ex-ante.

Suggested Citation

  • Klerkx, Laurens & van Bommel, Severine & Bos, Bram & Holster, Henri & Zwartkruis, Joyce V. & Aarts, Noelle, 2012. "Design process outputs as boundary objects in agricultural innovation projects: Functions and limitations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 39-49.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:113:y:2012:i:c:p:39-49
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2012.07.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X12001126
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2012.07.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kristjanson, Patti & Reid, Robin S. & Dickson, Nancy M. & Grace, Delia & Clark, William C. & Romney, Dannie & Puskur, Ranjitha & MacMillan, Susan, 2009. "Linking International Agricultural Research Knowledge with Action for Sustainable Development," Scholarly Articles 9774655, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    2. Schut, Marc & Slingerland, Maja & Locke, Anna, 2010. "Biofuel developments in Mozambique. Update and analysis of policy, potential and reality," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5151-5165, September.
    3. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    4. John Bessant & Lynne Maher, 2009. "Developing Radical Service Innovations In Healthcare — The Role Of Design Methods," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(04), pages 555-568.
    5. Rains, G.C. & Olson, D.M. & Lewis, W.J., 2011. "Redirecting technology to support sustainable farm management practices," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(4), pages 365-370, April.
    6. Kimble, Chris & Grenier, Corinne & Goglio-Primard, Karine, 2010. "Innovation and knowledge sharing across professional boundaries: Political interplay between boundary objects and brokers," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 437-444.
    7. Nahuis, Roel & Moors, Ellen H.M. & Smits, Ruud E.H.M., 2012. "User producer interaction in context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(6), pages 1121-1134.
    8. Esther Turnhout, 2009. "The effectiveness of boundary objects: the case of ecological indicators," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(5), pages 403-412, June.
    9. 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.
    10. van Ittersum, M. K. & Rabbinge, R. & van Latesteijn, H. C., 1998. "Exploratory land use studies and their role in strategic policy making," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 309-330, November.
    11. Douthwaite, B. & Keatinge, J. D. H. & Park, J. R., 2001. "Why promising technologies fail: the neglected role of user innovation during adoption," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 819-836, May.
    12. Boon, Wouter & Moors, Ellen, 2008. "Exploring emerging technologies using metaphors - A study of orphan drugs and pharmacogenomics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1915-1927, May.
    13. Kropff, M. J. & Bouma, J. & Jones, J. W., 2001. "Systems approaches for the design of sustainable agro-ecosystems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 70(2-3), pages 369-393.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Eastwood, C.R. & Chapman, D.F. & Paine, M.S., 2012. "Networks of practice for co-construction of agricultural decision support systems: Case studies of precision dairy farms in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 10-18.
    17. Klerkx, Laurens & Aarts, Noelle & Leeuwis, Cees, 2010. "Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 390-400, July.
    18. Sumberg, James & Okali, Christine & Reece, David, 2003. "Agricultural research in the face of diversity, local knowledge and the participation imperative: theoretical considerations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 739-753, May.
    19. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karly Ann Burch & Dawn Nafus & Katharine Legun & Laurens Klerkx, 2023. "Intellectual property meets transdisciplinary co-design: prioritizing responsiveness in the production of new AgTech through located response-ability," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(2), pages 455-474, June.
    2. Garb, Yaakov & Friedlander, Lonia, 2014. "From transfer to translation: Using systemic understandings of technology to understand drip irrigation uptake," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 13-24.
    3. Pissonnier, Solène & Dufils, Arnaud & Le Gal, Pierre-Yves, 2019. "A methodology for redesigning agroecological radical production systems at the farm level," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 161-171.
    4. Vänninen, Irene & Pereira-Querol, Marco & Engeström, Yrjö, 2015. "Generating transformative agency among horticultural producers: An activity-theoretical approach to transforming Integrated Pest Management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 38-49.
    5. Colnago, P. & Rossing, W.A.H. & Dogliotti, S., 2021. "Closing sustainability gaps on family farms: Combining on-farm co-innovation and model-based explorations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    6. LG Horlings & D Roep & W Wellbrock, 2018. "The role of leadership in place-based development and building institutional arrangements," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 33(3), pages 245-268, May.
    7. Moreira, Tatiana & Groot Koerkamp, Peter & Janssen, Arni & Stomph, Tjeerd-Jan & van der Werf, Wopke, 2023. "Breaking the mould: Developing innovative crop protection strategies with Reflexive Interactive Design," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    8. Romera, A.J. & Bos, A.P. & Neal, M. & Eastwood, C.R. & Chapman, D. & McWilliam, W. & Royds, D. & O'Connor, C. & Brookes, R. & Connolly, J. & Hall, P. & Clinton, P.W., 2020. "Designing future dairy systems for New Zealand using reflexive interactive design," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    9. Pant, Laxmi Prasad, 2016. "Paradox of mainstreaming agroecology for regional and rural food security in developing countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 305-316.
    10. Maria, Kernecker & Maria, Busse & Andrea, Knierim, 2021. "Exploring actors, their constellations, and roles in digital agricultural innovations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    11. Laxmi Prasad Pant, 2019. "Responsible innovation through conscious contestation at the interface of agricultural science, policy, and civil society," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(2), pages 183-197, June.
    12. Matthijs J Janssen & Joeri Wesseling & Jonas Torrens & K Matthias & Caetano Penna & Laurens Klerkx, 2023. "Missions as boundary objects for transformative change: understanding coordination across policy, research, and stakeholder communities," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(3), pages 398-415.
    13. Martin, G., 2015. "A conceptual framework to support adaptation of farming systems – Development and application with Forage Rummy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 52-61.
    14. Ditzler, Lenora & Klerkx, Laurens & Chan-Dentoni, Jacqueline & Posthumus, Helena & Krupnik, Timothy J. & Ridaura, Santiago López & Andersson, Jens A. & Baudron, Frédéric & Groot, Jeroen C.J., 2018. "Affordances of agricultural systems analysis tools: A review and framework to enhance tool design and implementation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 20-30.
    15. Graeme Nicholas, 2022. "Getting to practical: Complementarity between critical systems thinking and phronetic social science," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 913-922, September.
    16. Ryschawy, Julie & Grillot, Myriam & Charmeau, Anaïs & Pelletier, Aude & Moraine, Marc & Martin, Guillaume, 2022. "A participatory approach based on the serious game Dynamix to co-design scenarios of crop-livestock integration among farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    17. Eastwood, C.R. & Turner, F.J. & Romera, A.J., 2022. "Farmer-centred design: An affordances-based framework for identifying processes that facilitate farmers as co-designers in addressing complex agricultural challenges," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    18. Aare, Ane Kirstine & Lund, Søren & Hauggaard-Nielsen, Henrik, 2021. "Exploring transitions towards sustainable farming practices through participatory research – The case of Danish farmers' use of species mixtures," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    19. Benjamin Cabanes & Stéphane Hubac & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2021. "Improving reliability engineering in product development based on design theory: the case of FMEA in the semiconductor industry," Post-Print hal-03143866, HAL.
    20. 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.
    21. Salembier, Chloé & Segrestin, Blanche & Sinoir, Nicolas & Templier, Joseph & Weil, Benoît & Meynard, Jean-Marc, 2020. "Design of equipment for agroecology: Coupled innovation processes led by farmer-designers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    22. Rhiannon Craft & Hannah Pitt, 2024. "More than meat? Livestock farmers’ views on opportunities to produce for plant-based diets," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(3), pages 975-988, September.

    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. Salembier, Chloé & Segrestin, Blanche & Berthet, Elsa & Weil, Benoît & Meynard, Jean-Marc, 2018. "Genealogy of design reasoning in agronomy: Lessons for supporting the design of agricultural systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 277-290.
    2. Yang, Huan & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2014. "Functions and limitations of farmer cooperatives as innovation intermediaries: Findings from China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 115-125.
    3. Srinivasan, M.S. & Jongmans, C. & Bewsell, D. & Elley, G., 2019. "Research idea to science for impact: Tracing the significant moments in an innovation based irrigation study," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 181-192.
    4. Eastwood, C.R. & Chapman, D.F. & Paine, M.S., 2012. "Networks of practice for co-construction of agricultural decision support systems: Case studies of precision dairy farms in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 10-18.
    5. 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.
    6. Ditzler, Lenora & Klerkx, Laurens & Chan-Dentoni, Jacqueline & Posthumus, Helena & Krupnik, Timothy J. & Ridaura, Santiago López & Andersson, Jens A. & Baudron, Frédéric & Groot, Jeroen C.J., 2018. "Affordances of agricultural systems analysis tools: A review and framework to enhance tool design and implementation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 20-30.
    7. Melo, Sara & Bishop, Simon, 2020. "Translating healthcare research evidence into practice: The role of linked boundary objects," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    8. Ara, Iffat & Turner, Lydia & Harrison, Matthew Tom & Monjardino, Marta & deVoil, Peter & Rodriguez, Daniel, 2021. "Application, adoption and opportunities for improving decision support systems in irrigated agriculture: A review," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 257(C).
    9. Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2008. "Institutionalizing end-user demand steering in agricultural R&D: Farmer levy funding of R&D in The Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 460-472, April.
    10. Aurélie Cardona & Cristiana Carusi & Michael Mayerfeld Bell, 2021. "Engaged Intermediaries to Bridge the Gap between Scientists, Educational Practitioners and Farmers to Develop Sustainable Agri-Food Innovation Systems: A US Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-13, October.
    11. Siw M. Fosstenløkken, 2019. "The Role Of Plans In The Formation Of A New Innovation Practice: An Innovation Object Perspective," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(04), pages 1-23, May.
    12. Berrueta, Cecilia & Giménez, Gustavo & Dogliotti, Santiago, 2021. "Scaling up from crop to farm level: Co-innovation framework to improve vegetable farm systems sustainability," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    13. Cittadini, E.D. & Lubbers, M.T.M.H. & de Ridder, N. & van Keulen, H. & Claassen, G.D.H., 2008. "Exploring options for farm-level strategic and tactical decision-making in fruit production systems of South Patagonia, Argentina," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 189-198, October.
    14. 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).
    15. Totin, Edmond & Stroosnijder, Leo & Agbossou, Euloge, 2013. "Mulching upland rice for efficient water management: A collaborative approach in Benin," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 71-80.
    16. 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.
    17. Chris Kimble, 2013. "Knowledge management, codification and tacit knowledge," Post-Print halshs-00826911, HAL.
    18. Callum J Gunn & Sevgi E & Teresa Finlay & Lidewij Eva & Teun Zuiderent-Jerak & Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar, 2023. "Co-design and its consequences: developing a shared patient engagement framework in the IMI-PARADIGM project," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(6), pages 1018-1028.
    19. Norman Siebrecht, 2020. "Sustainable Agriculture and Its Implementation Gap—Overcoming Obstacles to Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-27, May.
    20. Omid Omidvar & Roman Kislov, 2016. "R&D Consortia As Boundary Organisations: Misalignment And Asymmetry Of Boundary Management," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-24, February.

    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:eee:agisys:v:113:y:2012:i:c:p:39-49. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    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.