Hauser, Michael (author), Lindtner, Mara (author), Prehsler, Sarah (author), Probst, Lorenz (author), and University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Austria
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2016-07-30
Published:
Austria: Science Direct
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 109 Document Number: D10962
9 pages, via online journal, Farmers who engage in farmer participatory research (FPR) change their established social roles in households and communities. As such, comprehension of farmers’ role transitions is important to understand the extrinsic and intrinsic factors impeding or supporting the uptake and use of FPR by farmers. The existing FPR literature, however, does not address such role transitions. In this study, we analyzed farmers’ experiences with FPR and underlying role transitions in a commercial organic agriculture project in western Uganda. We drew on quantitative and qualitative data from interviews, group discussions, and observations involving farmers and extension workers. Our results suggest extrinsic and intrinsic factors affect farmers’ self-conception, influencing their willingness to participate in FPR. The level of alignment between the self-conception and the anticipated role determines farmers’ decision regarding participation in FPR and affects their response pattern. Farmers’ response pattern and individual set of inhibitors and facilitators lead to the experience of role insufficiency or role mastery, which is crucial for farmers’ continuation or termination of on-farm experiments. Understanding and facilitating role transitions is, therefore, essential for sustaining on-farm experiments, which complements current technical FPR training.
20 pages, via online journal, Purpose: This paper demystifies the processes, methodologies and outputs of three co-design projects, identifying how and to what extent are aims and principles of the multi-actor approach realised and upheld in the field. Implications from the cases for participatory principles are discussed.
Design/Methodology/approach: A detailed ethnographic account is presented of three multi-actor co-design cases, supporting diverse readers’ interpretations and learnings.
Findings: Three paradoxes were identifiable from the multi-actor processes: (1) outputs can be orphaned when they lack strong identifiers and affiliations with discrete professional communities outside of the co-design team; (2) combining diverse knowledges co-design can generate outputs that are new and strange (rather than familiar and acceptable) to end-users; (3) for Responsible Research and Innovation, co-creating interventions that are challenging (rather than popular) to society may be required.
Practical implications: Awareness of dynamics and paradoxes arising in the implementation of multi-actor co-design supports enhanced facilitation of processes and impacts of outcomes. Together, the paradoxes highlight the critical importance of communications and engagement initiatives across diverse communities in the aftermath of co-design efforts.
Theoretical implications: Although co-design processes are case-dependent, reflexive accounts of how they play out contribute to the body of knowledge of how co-design may be better understood. The cases in this paper identify paradoxes with implications for principles and theory of multi-actor co-design.
Originality/Value: This paper presents a detailed account of three unique co-design processes. Practical and theoretical implications of the cases are identified.
