Sustainable development in modern animal husbandry faces a multiplicity of challenges. If addressed separately, the solutions might well contradict one another. To avoid this conflict, there is a need for structural change in production and consumption systems. Such change cannot be attained by technological innovation alone, but demands a reorientation of the existing sociotechnical regime. This paper presents reflexive interactive design (RIO in Dutch) as a systematic approach towards that end, and shows the first steps of its application in a project to deliver designs for sustainable dairy production and to contribute to a reformation of the current dairy production system.
BeckU. (1992 [1986]), Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, Sage Publications, London.
2.
BeckU. (1997), The Re-invention of Politics. Rethinking Modernity in the Global Social Order, Polity Press, Cambridge.
3.
BeckU.BonssW.LauC. (2003), ‘The theory of reflexive modernization. Problematic, hypotheses and research programme’, Theory, Culture & Society, Vol 20, No 2, pp 1–33.
BellucciJ.BellucciS. (2002), Participatory Technology Assessment: European Perspectives, Centre for the Study of Democracy, London.
6.
BerkhoutF.SmithA.StirlingA. (2004), ‘Socio-technical regimes and transition contexts’, in ElzenB. E.GeelsF. W.GreenK., eds, System Innovation and the Transition to Sustainability: Theory, Evidence and Policy, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
7.
BosA. P. (2008), ‘Instrumentalization theory and reflexive design in animal husbandry’, Social Epistemology, Vol 22, No 1, pp 29–50.
8.
BosA. P.CornelissenJ. M. R.KoerkampGroot P. W. G. (2009a), Kracht van Koeien – Ontwerpen voor systeeminnovatie (in Dutch), Wageningen UR, Lelystad.
9.
BosA. P.CornelissenJ. M. R.KoerkampGroot P. W. G. (2009b), Kracht van Koeien (Cow Power – Designs for System Innovation, Wageningen UR, Lelystad.
10.
BosA. P.GrinJ. (2008), ‘“Doing” reflexive modernization in pig husbandry: The hard work of changing the course of a river’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol 33, pp 480–507.
11.
BosA. P.KoerkampGroot P. W. G. (forthcoming), ‘Synthesizing needs in system innovation through methodical design. A methodical outline on the role of needs in Reflexive Interactive Design (RIO)’, in PoppeK. J., eds, Transitions Towards Sustainable Agriculture, Food Chains and Peri-Urban Areas, Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen.
12.
BrackeM. B. M.SpruijtB. M.MetzJ. H. M. (1999), ‘Overall animal welfare assessment reviewed. Part 3: Welfare assessment based on needs and supported by expert opinion’, Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science, Vol 47, pp 307–322.
13.
De BeerJ. C. F. (1997), Methodisch Ontwerpen, Academic Service, The Hague.
14.
Diergericht Ontwerpen, Projectteam (2003), Welzwijn in de toekomst, over varkenswensen voor varkensstallen, Wageningen UR, Wageningen/Lelystad.
15.
DosiG. (1982), ‘Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change’, Research Policy, No 11.
GeelsF. W. (2004), ‘From sectoral systems of innovation to sociotechnical systems: Insight about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory’, Research Policy, No 33, pp 897–920.
18.
GiddensA. (1984), The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Polity Press, Cambridge.
19.
GrinJ. (2005), ‘Reflexive modernization as a governance issue – or: Designing and shaping re-structuration’, in VoßJ.-P.BauknechtD.KempR., eds, Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
20.
GrinJ.Van de GraafH. (1996), ‘Technology assessment as learning’, Science, Technology & Human Values, Vol 21, No 1, pp 72–99.
21.
GrinJ.Van de GraafH.HoppeR. (1997), Technology Assessment Through Interaction: A Guide, SDU, The Hague.
22.
GrinJ.Van StaverenA. (2007), Werken aan systeeminnovaties. Lessen uit de praktijk van InnovatieNetwerk, Van Gorcum, Assen.
23.
KoerkampGroot P. W. G.BosA. P. (2008), ‘Designing complex and sustainable agricultural production systems: An integrated and reflexive approach for the case of table egg production in the Netherlands’, NJAS – Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, Vol 55, No 2, pp 113–138.
24.
GutmannA.ThompsonD. (1996), Democracy and Disagreement. Why Moral Conflict Cannot Be Avoided in Politics, and What Should be Done About It, Belknap Press, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, and London.
25.
Houden van Hennen, Projectteam (2004), Laying Hen Husbandry – Towards a Happy Hen Life, Proud Farmers and a Satisfied Society, Wageningen UR, Wageningen/Lelystad.
26.
In 't VeldJ. (1974), Systeem en modelbegrippen, systeembenadering van bedrijven en instellingen, procesbeheersing (in Dutch), Delft Technische Hogeschool, Delft.
27.
LatourB. (2003), ‘Is re-modernization occurring – and if so, how to prove it? A commentary on Ulrich Beck’, Theory, Culture & Society, Vol 20, No 2, pp 35–48.
28.
LoorbachD. (2007), Transition Management. New Mode of Governance for Sustainable Development, International Books, Utrecht.
29.
McDonoughW.BraungartM. (2002), Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things, North Point Press, New York.
30.
MilieudefensieActiefJongeren Milieu (2007a), ‘Boeren met toekomst. Burgerinitiatief Stop fout vlees’, Milieudefensie, Amsterdam.
31.
MilieudefensieActiefJongeren Milieu (2007b), ‘Stop fout vlees’, Milieudefensie, Amsterdam.
32.
NelsonR. R.WinterS. G. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
33.
RipA.KempR. (1998a), ‘Technological change’, in RaynerS.MajoneE. L., eds, Human Choice and Climate Change, Volume II, Batelle Press, Washington, DC.
34.
RipA.KempR. (1998b), ‘Technological change’, in RaynerS.MaloneE. L., eds, Human Choice and Climate Change, Batelle Press, Washington, DC.
35.
RoepD.Van Der PloegJ. D.WiskerkeJ. S. C. H. (2003), ‘Managing technical–institutional design processes: Some strategic lessons from environmental co-operatives in the Netherlands’, NJAS – Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, Vol 51, No 1/2, pp 195–217.
36.
RotmansJ. (2003), Transitiemanagement: sleutel voor een duurzame samenleving, Van Gorcum, Assen.
37.
SchotJ. W. (1992), ‘Constructive technology assessment and technology dynamics: The case of clean technologies’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol 17, No 1, pp 36–56.
38.
SchotJ. W. (1998), ‘The usefulness of evolutionary models for explaining innovation: The case of the Netherlands in the 19th century’, History and Technology, Vol 14, pp 173–200.
39.
SiersF. J. (2004), Methodisch ontwerpen volgens H.H. van den Kroonenberg, Wolters-Noordhoff, Amsterdam.
40.
SteinfeldH.GerberP.WassenaarT.CastelV.RosalesM.HaanC. D. (2006), Livestock's Long Shadow. Environmental Issues and Options, FAO, Rome.
41.
StonesR. (2005), Structuration Theory, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke and New York.
42.
ThiemeM. L. (2007), Meat the Truth, Nicolaas G. Pierson Foundation, Amsterdam.
43.
VerburgG. (2008), ‘Toekomstvisie op de veehouderij. Brief aan de Tweede Kamer’, 16 January, Ministerie van LNV, The Hague.
44.
VoßJ. P.KempR. (2005), ‘Reflexive governance: Learning to cope with fundamental limitations in steering sustainable development’, ESEE Conference, Lisbon.
