{"title":"传感器和传感实践:塑造农业可持续发展的农业系统战略","authors":"Lenn Gorissen, Kornelia Konrad, Esther Turnhout","doi":"10.1007/s10460-024-10686-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>While sustainability in farming is increasingly recognised, practical implementation faces obstacles, including knowledge gaps that hinder farmers’ effective adaptation. Agricultural sensors have emerged as tools to assist farmers in offering real-time monitoring capabilities, which can provide information to support decision-making towards sustainable crop production. However, critical analyses point out that innovation in agricultural equipment predominantly focuses on optimising the dominant intensification model, while sensors might also facilitate biodiversity-based strategies toward agricultural sustainability, which aim to replace chemical inputs through intensified ecological interactions. In this article, we examine the intricate relationship between technology and practice, recognising that the functionality of sensors is contingent upon the user, manner of use, and implementation context. We employ social practice theory to examine farmers’ current sensor usage and broader sensing practices in farming system strategies that align either more with efficiency/substitution-based or with biodiversity-based approaches toward agricultural sustainability. Through this approach, we elucidate how sensors and sensing practices contribute to knowledge production and management in both farming systems. Drawing on 11 semi-structured interviews with Dutch farmers, we identify diverse sensing practices that can enable different types of knowledge: oversight—enabling farmers to optimise the efficiency of production—and insight—offering a holistic and long-term understanding of ecological relations and how they affect production. We conclude by discussing the implications of these sensing practices and types of knowledge for strategies for agricultural sustainability.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7683,"journal":{"name":"Agriculture and Human Values","volume":"42 3","pages":"1477 - 1495"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-024-10686-w.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sensors and sensing practices: shaping farming system strategies toward agricultural sustainability\",\"authors\":\"Lenn Gorissen, Kornelia Konrad, Esther Turnhout\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10460-024-10686-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>While sustainability in farming is increasingly recognised, practical implementation faces obstacles, including knowledge gaps that hinder farmers’ effective adaptation. Agricultural sensors have emerged as tools to assist farmers in offering real-time monitoring capabilities, which can provide information to support decision-making towards sustainable crop production. However, critical analyses point out that innovation in agricultural equipment predominantly focuses on optimising the dominant intensification model, while sensors might also facilitate biodiversity-based strategies toward agricultural sustainability, which aim to replace chemical inputs through intensified ecological interactions. In this article, we examine the intricate relationship between technology and practice, recognising that the functionality of sensors is contingent upon the user, manner of use, and implementation context. We employ social practice theory to examine farmers’ current sensor usage and broader sensing practices in farming system strategies that align either more with efficiency/substitution-based or with biodiversity-based approaches toward agricultural sustainability. Through this approach, we elucidate how sensors and sensing practices contribute to knowledge production and management in both farming systems. Drawing on 11 semi-structured interviews with Dutch farmers, we identify diverse sensing practices that can enable different types of knowledge: oversight—enabling farmers to optimise the efficiency of production—and insight—offering a holistic and long-term understanding of ecological relations and how they affect production. We conclude by discussing the implications of these sensing practices and types of knowledge for strategies for agricultural sustainability.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7683,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agriculture and Human Values\",\"volume\":\"42 3\",\"pages\":\"1477 - 1495\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-024-10686-w.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agriculture and Human Values\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-024-10686-w\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agriculture and Human Values","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-024-10686-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Sensors and sensing practices: shaping farming system strategies toward agricultural sustainability
While sustainability in farming is increasingly recognised, practical implementation faces obstacles, including knowledge gaps that hinder farmers’ effective adaptation. Agricultural sensors have emerged as tools to assist farmers in offering real-time monitoring capabilities, which can provide information to support decision-making towards sustainable crop production. However, critical analyses point out that innovation in agricultural equipment predominantly focuses on optimising the dominant intensification model, while sensors might also facilitate biodiversity-based strategies toward agricultural sustainability, which aim to replace chemical inputs through intensified ecological interactions. In this article, we examine the intricate relationship between technology and practice, recognising that the functionality of sensors is contingent upon the user, manner of use, and implementation context. We employ social practice theory to examine farmers’ current sensor usage and broader sensing practices in farming system strategies that align either more with efficiency/substitution-based or with biodiversity-based approaches toward agricultural sustainability. Through this approach, we elucidate how sensors and sensing practices contribute to knowledge production and management in both farming systems. Drawing on 11 semi-structured interviews with Dutch farmers, we identify diverse sensing practices that can enable different types of knowledge: oversight—enabling farmers to optimise the efficiency of production—and insight—offering a holistic and long-term understanding of ecological relations and how they affect production. We conclude by discussing the implications of these sensing practices and types of knowledge for strategies for agricultural sustainability.
期刊介绍:
Agriculture and Human Values is the journal of the Agriculture, Food, and Human Values Society. The Journal, like the Society, is dedicated to an open and free discussion of the values that shape and the structures that underlie current and alternative visions of food and agricultural systems.
To this end the Journal publishes interdisciplinary research that critically examines the values, relationships, conflicts and contradictions within contemporary agricultural and food systems and that addresses the impact of agricultural and food related institutions, policies, and practices on human populations, the environment, democratic governance, and social equity.