13 pages, via Online Journal, This paper contributes to our understanding of farm data value chains with assistance from 54 semi-structured interviews and field notes from participant observations. Methodologically, it includes individuals, such as farmers, who hold well-known positionalities within digital agriculture spaces—platforms that include precision farming techniques, farm equipment built on machine learning architecture and algorithms, and robotics—while also including less visible elements and practices. The actors interviewed and materialities and performances observed thus came from spaces and places inhabited by, for example, farmers, crop scientists, statisticians, programmers, and senior leadership in firms located in the U.S. and Canada. The stability of “the” artifacts followed for this project proved challenging, which led to me rethinking how to approach the subject conceptually. The paper is animated by a posthumanist commitment, drawing heavily from assemblage thinking and critical data scholarship coming out of Science and Technology Studies. The argument’s understanding of “chains” therefore lies on an alternative conceptual plane relative to most commodity chain scholarship. To speak of a data value chain is to foreground an orchestrating set of relations among humans, non-humans, products, spaces, places, and practices. The paper’s principle contribution involves interrogating lock-in tendencies at different “points” along the digital farm platform assemblage while pushing for a varied understanding of governance depending on the roles of the actors and actants involved.
Pollock, John C. (author), Peitz, Krysti (author), Watson, Elizabeth (author), Esposito, Cara (author), Nichilo, Phil (author), Etheridge, James (author), Morgan, Melissa (author), and Hart-McGonigle, Taylor (author)
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2017
Published:
Springer
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 93 Document Number: D10865
26 pages., via online journal., A community structure analysis compared cross-national coverage of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) with variations in national-level demographics from 19 newspapers worldwide, yielding combined article “prominence” and “direction” “Media Vector” newspaper scores emphasizing either “favorable” (42%) or “unfavorable” (58%) coverage of GMOs. Regression analysis revealed “poverty level” (24.2% of variance) and “percent of agricultural land” (4.7%) totaled 28.9% of the variance, confirming that “vulnerability” indicators are associated with favorable media coverage of GMOs. Contrary to conventional “guard dog” assumptions that media mirror elite interests, systematic research on demographics and GMO coverage reveals that media can mirror the interests of society’s most “vulnerable.”
New-Aaron, Moses (author), Semin, Jessica (author), Duysen, Ellen G. (author), Madsen, Murray (author), Musil, Kelsie (author), and Rautiainen, Risto H. (author)
Format:
Journal article abstract
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
USA: Taylor & Francis
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 25 Document Number: D10537
8 pages., via online journal., The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) publishes annual statistics on occupational injuries and fatalities in the United States. The BLS fatality data include all agricultural workers while the non-fatal injury data only cover hired employees on large farms. In 2012, the Central States Center for Agricultural Safety and Health (CS-CASH) began collecting regional media monitoring data of agricultural injury incidents to augment national statistics. The aims of this report were: a) to compare CS-CASH injury and fatality data collected via print and online sources to data reported in previous studies, and b) to compare fatality data from media monitoring to BLS Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) data. CS-CASH media monitoring data were collected from a news clipping service and an internet detection and notification system. These data covered years 2012–2017 in seven Midwestern states (Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota). CS-CASH occupational fatality data were compared with aggregate CFOI data for the region during 2012–2015. Media monitoring captured 1048 injury cases; 586 (56%) were non-fatal and 462 (44%) were fatal. The numbers of occupational fatality cases from media monitoring and CFOI were nearly identical (280 vs. 282, respectively), and the distributions by type of injury were similar. Findings suggest that media monitoring can capture equal numbers of fatalities compared to CFOI. Non-fatal injuries, not captured by national surveillance systems, can be collected and tracked using print and electronic media. Risk factors, identified in media sources, such as gender, age, time, and source of the incident are consistent with previously reported data. Media monitoring can provide timely access to detailed information on individual cases, which is important for detecting unique and emerging hazards, designing interventions and for setting policy and guiding national strategies.
