Democratizing ownership and participation in the 4th Industrial Revolution: challenges and opportunities in cellular agriculture

Social science - STEM collaborations in agriculture, food and beyond: an STSFAN manifesto

Interdisciplinary research needs innovation. As an action-oriented intervention, this Manifesto begins from the authors' experiences as social scientists working within interdisciplinary science and technology collaborations in agriculture and food. We draw from these experiences to: 1) explain what social scientists contribute to interdisciplinary agri-food tech collaborations; (2) describe barriers to substantive and meaningful collaboration; and (3) propose ways to overcome these barriers. We encourage funding bodies to develop mechanisms that ensure funded projects respect the integrity of social science expertise and incorporate its insights. We also call for the integration of social scientific questions and methods in interdisciplinary projects from the outset, and for a genuine curiosity on the part of STEM and social science researchers alike about the knowledge and skills each of us has to offer. We contend that cultivating such integration and curiosity within interdisciplinary collaborations will make them more enriching for all researchers involved, and more likely to generate socially beneficial outcomes.

The Digital Transformation of the Agricultural Value Chain: Discourses on Opportunities, Challenges and Controversial Perspectives on Governance Approaches

The extent to which the digitalisation of agriculture will make a significant contribution to solving urgent sustainability challenges will depend on the design of political, legal and economic frameworks. In this context, social discourses play a central role as they not only reflect collective interpretations and systems of meaning but also reproduce power relations in “truth regimes” and prepare policy actions. While a critical scientific debate on unintended side effects of the digital transformation on agriculture has recently emerged, there is little knowledge about the discourse relations beyond academia. This article presents the results of a discourse analysis during a two-day online conference on the digital transformation of the agricultural value chain. We systematically visited and analysed sessions and presentations. The aim was to identify the main themes, concepts and ideas and different perspectives among actors from science and practice. The results show a wide range of perceived opportunities and challenges but also controversies, especially regarding governance issues such as regulation versus nonregulation, centralised versus decentralised data sharing, the appropriate design of data sovereignty models and trust and evolving inequalities. In addition, it became apparent that discourses on digitalisation are largely expert affairs. We discuss and conclude that a sustainability-oriented digital transformation requires a critical perspective, reflexivity and an adaptive governance approach where science–society collaborations play a central role.

Patterns of Inequalities in Digital Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review

Digitalization of agriculture is often hailed as the next agricultural revolution. However, little is yet known about its social impacts and power effects. This review addresses this research gap by analyzing patterns of inequality linked to the development and adoption of digital technologies in agriculture and reviewing the strategies developed to reduce these inequalities and challenge the power relations in which they are embedded. Analysis of 84 publications found through a systematic literature review identified five patterns of inequality: (1) in digital technology development; (2) in the distribution of benefits from the use of digital technologies; (3) in sovereignty over data, hardware and digital infrastructure; (4) in skills and knowledge (‘digital literacy’); and (5) in problem definition and problem-solving capacities. This review also highlights the existence of emancipatory initiatives that are applying digital technologies to challenge existing inequalities and to advance alternative visions of agriculture. These initiatives underscore the political nature of digital agriculture; however, their reach is still quite limited. This is partly due to the fact that existing inequalities are structural and represent expressions of corporate power. From such a perspective, digitalization in agriculture is not a ‘revolution’ per se; rather, digital technologies mirror and reproduce existing power relations.