新西兰农业知识和创新系统中的数字化:对数字农业的初步理解和新兴组织反应

Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences Njas-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences Pub Date : 2019-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.njas.2019.100313
Kelly Rijswijk , Laurens Klerkx , James A. Turner
{"title":"新西兰农业知识和创新系统中的数字化:对数字农业的初步理解和新兴组织反应","authors":"Kelly Rijswijk ,&nbsp;Laurens Klerkx ,&nbsp;James A. Turner","doi":"10.1016/j.njas.2019.100313","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Digital agriculture is likely to transform productive processes both on- and off- farm, as well as the broader social and institutional context using digital technologies. It is largely unknown how agricultural knowledge providing organisations, such as advisors and science organisations, understand and respond to digital agriculture. The concept of ‘organisational identity’ is used to describe both initial understandings of, and emerging responses, to digital agriculture, which together show how organisations ‘digi-grasp’, i.e. make sense of and enact digitalisation in their organisations. The understanding is described using aspects of identity change (i.e. the nature, pace, source and context of digital agriculture), while the responses are outlined through the various attributes of organisational identity (i.e. capabilities, practices, services, clients, partners, purpose and values). We explore this question in the context of New Zealand through 29 semi-structured interviews with different types of agricultural knowledge providers, including farm advisors, science organisations, as well as technology providers. The findings show that digitalisation is often understood as farm-centric, despite being considered disruptive both on- and off-farm. These understandings influence an organisation’s digitalisation responses to digital agriculture. The responses were often ad-hoc, starting with adapting organisational capabilities, practices and services as their clients and partners require, rather than a strategic approach allowing for more flexibility of roles and processes and changing business models. The ad-hoc approach appears to be a response to uncertainty as digital agriculture is in early stages of development. This indicates that agricultural knowledge and innovation system should better support agricultural knowledge providers in digi-grasping and developing a digitalisation strategy, by anticipating possible futures and reflecting on the consequences of these for value propositions, business models and organisational identities of agricultural knowledge providers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49751,"journal":{"name":"Njas-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences","volume":"90 ","pages":"Article 100313"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.njas.2019.100313","citationCount":"69","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digitalisation in the New Zealand Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System: Initial understandings and emerging organisational responses to digital agriculture\",\"authors\":\"Kelly Rijswijk ,&nbsp;Laurens Klerkx ,&nbsp;James A. Turner\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.njas.2019.100313\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Digital agriculture is likely to transform productive processes both on- and off- farm, as well as the broader social and institutional context using digital technologies. It is largely unknown how agricultural knowledge providing organisations, such as advisors and science organisations, understand and respond to digital agriculture. The concept of ‘organisational identity’ is used to describe both initial understandings of, and emerging responses, to digital agriculture, which together show how organisations ‘digi-grasp’, i.e. make sense of and enact digitalisation in their organisations. The understanding is described using aspects of identity change (i.e. the nature, pace, source and context of digital agriculture), while the responses are outlined through the various attributes of organisational identity (i.e. capabilities, practices, services, clients, partners, purpose and values). We explore this question in the context of New Zealand through 29 semi-structured interviews with different types of agricultural knowledge providers, including farm advisors, science organisations, as well as technology providers. The findings show that digitalisation is often understood as farm-centric, despite being considered disruptive both on- and off-farm. These understandings influence an organisation’s digitalisation responses to digital agriculture. The responses were often ad-hoc, starting with adapting organisational capabilities, practices and services as their clients and partners require, rather than a strategic approach allowing for more flexibility of roles and processes and changing business models. The ad-hoc approach appears to be a response to uncertainty as digital agriculture is in early stages of development. This indicates that agricultural knowledge and innovation system should better support agricultural knowledge providers in digi-grasping and developing a digitalisation strategy, by anticipating possible futures and reflecting on the consequences of these for value propositions, business models and organisational identities of agricultural knowledge providers.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49751,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Njas-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences\",\"volume\":\"90 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100313\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.njas.2019.100313\",\"citationCount\":\"69\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Njas-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1573521419300120\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Njas-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1573521419300120","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 69

摘要

数字农业有可能利用数字技术改变农场内外的生产过程,以及更广泛的社会和制度背景。提供农业知识的组织,如顾问和科学组织,如何理解和应对数字农业,这在很大程度上是未知的。“组织认同”的概念用于描述对数字农业的初步理解和新兴反应,它们共同展示了组织如何“数字化把握”,即在其组织中理解和实施数字化。使用身份变化的各个方面(即数字农业的性质、速度、来源和背景)来描述理解,而通过组织身份的各种属性(即能力、实践、服务、客户、合作伙伴、目的和价值观)来概述响应。我们通过对不同类型的农业知识提供者(包括农场顾问、科学组织以及技术提供者)的29次半结构化访谈,在新西兰的背景下探讨了这个问题。研究结果表明,数字化通常被理解为以农场为中心,尽管在农场内外都被认为具有破坏性。这些理解会影响组织对数字农业的数字化响应。响应通常是临时的,首先根据客户和合作伙伴的要求调整组织能力、实践和服务,而不是采用允许角色和流程更灵活以及改变业务模型的战略方法。这种特别的方法似乎是对数字农业处于早期发展阶段的不确定性的回应。这表明,农业知识和创新系统应通过预测可能的未来,并反思这些对农业知识提供者的价值主张、商业模式和组织身份的影响,更好地支持农业知识提供者掌握数字化和制定数字化战略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Digitalisation in the New Zealand Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System: Initial understandings and emerging organisational responses to digital agriculture

Digital agriculture is likely to transform productive processes both on- and off- farm, as well as the broader social and institutional context using digital technologies. It is largely unknown how agricultural knowledge providing organisations, such as advisors and science organisations, understand and respond to digital agriculture. The concept of ‘organisational identity’ is used to describe both initial understandings of, and emerging responses, to digital agriculture, which together show how organisations ‘digi-grasp’, i.e. make sense of and enact digitalisation in their organisations. The understanding is described using aspects of identity change (i.e. the nature, pace, source and context of digital agriculture), while the responses are outlined through the various attributes of organisational identity (i.e. capabilities, practices, services, clients, partners, purpose and values). We explore this question in the context of New Zealand through 29 semi-structured interviews with different types of agricultural knowledge providers, including farm advisors, science organisations, as well as technology providers. The findings show that digitalisation is often understood as farm-centric, despite being considered disruptive both on- and off-farm. These understandings influence an organisation’s digitalisation responses to digital agriculture. The responses were often ad-hoc, starting with adapting organisational capabilities, practices and services as their clients and partners require, rather than a strategic approach allowing for more flexibility of roles and processes and changing business models. The ad-hoc approach appears to be a response to uncertainty as digital agriculture is in early stages of development. This indicates that agricultural knowledge and innovation system should better support agricultural knowledge providers in digi-grasping and developing a digitalisation strategy, by anticipating possible futures and reflecting on the consequences of these for value propositions, business models and organisational identities of agricultural knowledge providers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Njas-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences
Njas-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 农林科学-农业综合
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: The NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, published since 1952, is the quarterly journal of the Royal Netherlands Society for Agricultural Sciences. NJAS aspires to be the main scientific platform for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research on complex and persistent problems in agricultural production, food and nutrition security and natural resource management. The societal and technical challenges in these domains require research integrating scientific disciplines and finding novel combinations of methodologies and conceptual frameworks. Moreover, the composite nature of these problems and challenges fits transdisciplinary research approaches embedded in constructive interactions with policy and practice and crossing the boundaries between science and society. Engaging with societal debate and creating decision space is an important task of research about the diverse impacts of novel agri-food technologies or policies. The international nature of food and nutrition security (e.g. global value chains, standardisation, trade), environmental problems (e.g. climate change or competing claims on natural resources), and risks related to agriculture (e.g. the spread of plant and animal diseases) challenges researchers to focus not only on lower levels of aggregation, but certainly to use interdisciplinary research to unravel linkages between scales or to analyse dynamics at higher levels of aggregation. NJAS recognises that the widely acknowledged need for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research, also increasingly expressed by policy makers and practitioners, needs a platform for creative researchers and out-of-the-box thinking in the domains of agriculture, food and environment. The journal aims to offer space for grounded, critical, and open discussions that advance the development and application of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research methodologies in the agricultural and life sciences.
期刊最新文献
Identifying socio-psychological constructs and beliefs underlying farmers’ intention to adopt on-farm silos Motivational factors influencing farming practices in northern Ghana Is the farmer field school still relevant? Case studies from Malawi and Indonesia The role of shade trees in influencing farmers’ adoption of cocoa agroforestry systems: Insight from semi-deciduous rain forest agroecological zone of Ghana Public private collaborations amidst an emergency plant disease outbreak: The Australian experience with biosecurity for Panama disease
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1