Search

We have seen an emergence of transformative food studies as part of sustainability transitions. While some scholars have successfully opened up their experiences of pursuing transformation through scholar-activism, assumptions underlying researchers' choices and how scholars orient to and go about their work often remain implicit. In this article, we bring forth a practice theoretical understanding of knowledge production and advocate that researchers turn to examining their own research practice. We ask how to make our own academic knowledge production/research practice more explicit, and why it is important to do so in the context of transformative food studies. To help scholars to reflect on their own research practice, we mobilize the framework of practical activity (FPA). We draw on our own experiences in academia and use our ethnographic studies on self-reliant food production and procurement to illustrate academic knowledge production. Thus, this article provides conceptual and methodological tools for reflection on academic research practice and knowledge production. We argue that it is important for researchers to turn to and improve their own academic practice because it advances academic knowledge production in the domain of transformative food studies and beyond. While we position ourselves within the qualitative research tradition, we believe that the insights of this article can be applied more broadly in different research fields and across various methodological approaches.

© 2018 The Authors Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Rationale, aims, and objectives: Much of the literature concerned with health care practice tends to focus on a decision-making model in which knowledge sits within the minds and bodies of health care workers. Practice theories de-centre knowledge from human actors, instead situating knowing in the interactions between all human and non-human actors. The purpose of this study was to explore how practice arises in the moment-to-moment interactions between general dental practitioners (GDPs), patients, nurses, and things. Method: Eight GDPs in two dental practices, their respective nurses, 23 patients, and material things were video-recorded as they interacted within clinical encounters. Videos were analysed using a performative approach. Several analytic methods were used: coding of interactions in-video; pencil drawings with transcripts; and dynamic transcription. These were used pragmatically and in combination. Detailed reflective notes were recorded at all stages of the analysis, and, as new insights developed, theory was sought to help inform these. Results: We theorized that knowing in dental practice arises as actors translate embodied knowing through sayings and doings that anticipate but cannot predict responses, that knowing is constrained by the interactions of the practice but that the interactions at the same time are a collective bricolage—using the actors' respective embodied knowing to generate and solve problems together. Conclusion: Practices are ongoing ecological accomplishments to which people and things skilfully contribute through translation of their respective embodied knowing of multiple practices. Based on this, we argue that practices are more likely to improve if people and things embody practices of improvement.

Ambiguities have long intrigued design and new product development (NPD) researchers: The fascination seems rooted in an endeavor to understand how design outcomes may be created despite the ambiguous nature of such work. There are several classic contributions on how to categorize, avoid and approach ambiguities. Some of the newer theories have also pointed to benefits arising from temporarily sustaining ambiguity. Little research has considered how ambiguities emerge, how ambiguities are sensed by practitioners, and the actions the practitioners take, either to harness or to reduce the generative and transformative power of ambiguity, however. This is unfortunate, since ambiguities are at the heart of such knowing-work. If one does not know how to sense the emergence of ambiguities and act to reduce or harness their generative and transformative power, i.e. negotiate ambiguity, the work might become unproductive, confused, uncreative, and might require more energy and attention. The purpose of this research is to portray how ambiguities emerge and are negotiated in knowing-work. This is achieved by drawing on two cases of design and NPD work, from practice epistemology. The results indicated that the emerging ambiguities changed in the ongoing work, some being reduced, others becoming obsolete or persisting. The results also included five generalized actions to negotiate ambiguity: (1) constructing points of references, (2) mediating between perspectives, (3) anchoring in expertise, (4) disarming future resistance, and (5) creating shared visions. This research has concluded that the very essence of design work concerns the emergence and fading away of ambiguity. The actions taken to negotiate ambiguity mediates the emergence of the design outcome. This research makes two contributions: first, it illustrates how ambiguities open up design work by creating a space for action; second, it illustrates how actions to negotiate ambiguity maneuver in this space for action. Den typ av arbete som tar sig an utvecklandet av nya produkter och tjänster omges ofta av oklarhet kring vad som skall skapas, hur den framtida marknaden ser ut samt vilka utmaningar som kommer att framträda under arbetets gång. Sådana oklarheter har studerats i design- och produktutvecklingsforskning, ofta under antagandet att oklarheterna bör undvikas och minimeras. Dock finns det även nyare forskning som pekar mot att oklarheter kan vara fördelaktiga i arbetet. Forskningen är dock begränsad vad gäller hur oklarheterna framträder i arbetet, hur praktiker förnimmer dessa oklarheter, samt hur en kan ta sig an dessa oklara situationer för att söka reducera eller dra nytta av potentialen i oklara situationer. Detta är olyckligt, då oklarhet ligger i skapandearbetets kärna. En sådan begränsad kunskapsbildning leder till förenklade antaganden kring oklarhetens roll i design- och produktutvecklingsarbete. Därtill får det rent praktiska konsekvenser då designkonsulternas praktik och yrkeskunnande delvis är höljd i dunkel, genom att deras förmåga att förnimma och förhandla oklarhet tidigare förbisetts. Syftet med denna forskning är således att studera hur oklarheter framträder samt förhandlas i skapandearbete, genom att stödja sig på empiriska studier av arbetet i två designkonsultföretag, utifrån ett praktikperspektiv. Resultaten visar både att oklarheter uppkommer och försvinner kontinuerligt i arbetet, samt beskriver fem förhandlingsaktiviteter: (1) skapa referenspunkter; (2) medla mellan perspektiv; (3) förankra i expertis; (4) avväpna framtida motstånd; och (5) skapa gemensamma visioner. Slutsatserna visar på att oklarheter skapar tolkningsutrymme i arbetet: i tvetydighetens många tolkningar öppnas ett utrymme för skapande och möjlighet till omtolkning. Därtill framkommer att förhandlingsaktiviteterna manövrerar i detta tolkningsutrymme, genom att nyttja eller minska oklarhetens många tolkningar. QC 20170508