Contested definitions of digital agri-food system transformation: A webpage and network analysis
This article explores how digital agri-food system transformations are framed and by whom. To answer these questions, we searched for webpages linked to Twitter and by Google that describe the role of emerging digital technologies in agri-food systems. From these, we characterize three framings of t...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Intellect
2023-04-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Food Design |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://intellectdiscover.com/content/journals/10.1386/ijfd_00050_1 |
| _version_ | 1797794470212665344 |
|---|---|
| author | Evan D. G. Fraser |
| author_facet | Evan D. G. Fraser |
| author_sort | Evan D. G. Fraser |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This article explores how digital agri-food system transformations are framed and by whom. To answer these questions, we searched for webpages linked to Twitter and by Google that describe the role of emerging digital technologies in agri-food systems. From these, we characterize three framings of transformation. The first framing proposes that digital tools make farms optimally productive. A second framing emphasizes inequities in access to digital tools and increased farmer participation in tech development. A third framing highlights how technology creates more traceable agri-food systems. We then conducted a social network analysis of webpage authors, finding three network clusters. The largest centres on intergovernmental and international development organizations that typically promote the first and third framings. The second framing is mostly promoted by academic and civil society actors and was least common across webpages, suggesting that digital agriculture trajectories may overlook farmer autonomy and agency. Framings vary in the degree of transformation they promote and their consideration of smaller-scale farms’ needs. We suggest that digital agri-food system transformation efforts are more diverse than typically described in the literature. We recommend public and private actors work with academics and civil society organizations to enhance farmer inclusion in designing novel transformative approaches. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-13T03:03:18Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-0b67c6122454455d9270a2721193c52a |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2056-6522 2056-6530 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-13T03:03:18Z |
| publishDate | 2023-04-01 |
| publisher | Intellect |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Journal of Food Design |
| spelling | doaj.art-0b67c6122454455d9270a2721193c52a2023-06-27T10:02:52ZengIntellectInternational Journal of Food Design2056-65222056-65302023-04-0181356010.1386/ijfd_00050_1http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/ijfd/8/1Contested definitions of digital agri-food system transformation: A webpage and network analysisEvan D. G. Fraser0https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5124-488XISNI: 0000000419368198 University of GuelphThis article explores how digital agri-food system transformations are framed and by whom. To answer these questions, we searched for webpages linked to Twitter and by Google that describe the role of emerging digital technologies in agri-food systems. From these, we characterize three framings of transformation. The first framing proposes that digital tools make farms optimally productive. A second framing emphasizes inequities in access to digital tools and increased farmer participation in tech development. A third framing highlights how technology creates more traceable agri-food systems. We then conducted a social network analysis of webpage authors, finding three network clusters. The largest centres on intergovernmental and international development organizations that typically promote the first and third framings. The second framing is mostly promoted by academic and civil society actors and was least common across webpages, suggesting that digital agriculture trajectories may overlook farmer autonomy and agency. Framings vary in the degree of transformation they promote and their consideration of smaller-scale farms’ needs. We suggest that digital agri-food system transformation efforts are more diverse than typically described in the literature. We recommend public and private actors work with academics and civil society organizations to enhance farmer inclusion in designing novel transformative approaches.https://intellectdiscover.com/content/journals/10.1386/ijfd_00050_1social network analysisresilienceframing analysisfood systemsTwittersmart farming |
| spellingShingle | Evan D. G. Fraser Contested definitions of digital agri-food system transformation: A webpage and network analysis International Journal of Food Design social network analysis resilience framing analysis food systems smart farming |
| title | Contested definitions of digital agri-food system transformation: A webpage and network analysis |
| title_full | Contested definitions of digital agri-food system transformation: A webpage and network analysis |
| title_fullStr | Contested definitions of digital agri-food system transformation: A webpage and network analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Contested definitions of digital agri-food system transformation: A webpage and network analysis |
| title_short | Contested definitions of digital agri-food system transformation: A webpage and network analysis |
| title_sort | contested definitions of digital agri food system transformation a webpage and network analysis |
| topic | social network analysis resilience framing analysis food systems smart farming |
| url | https://intellectdiscover.com/content/journals/10.1386/ijfd_00050_1 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT evandgfraser contesteddefinitionsofdigitalagrifoodsystemtransformationawebpageandnetworkanalysis |