The extent to which the digitalisation of agriculture will make a significant contribution to solving urgent sustainability challenges will depend on the design of political, legal and economic frameworks. In this context, social discourses play a central role as they not only reflect collective interpretations and systems of meaning but also reproduce power relations in “truth regimes” and prepare policy actions. While a critical scientific debate on unintended side effects of the digital transformation on agriculture has recently emerged, there is little knowledge about the discourse relations beyond academia. This article presents the results of a discourse analysis during a two-day online conference on the digital transformation of the agricultural value chain. We systematically visited and analysed sessions and presentations. The aim was to identify the main themes, concepts and ideas and different perspectives among actors from science and practice. The results show a wide range of perceived opportunities and challenges but also controversies, especially regarding governance issues such as regulation versus nonregulation, centralised versus decentralised data sharing, the appropriate design of data sovereignty models and trust and evolving inequalities. In addition, it became apparent that discourses on digitalisation are largely expert affairs. We discuss and conclude that a sustainability-oriented digital transformation requires a critical perspective, reflexivity and an adaptive governance approach where science–society collaborations play a central role.

Transdisciplinary research (TDR) is discussed as a promising approach in land-use science and spatial research to address complex multifaceted “real-world problems” and to design strategies and solutions for sustainable development. TDR has become a widespread research approach in sustainability science and is increasingly promoted by research programmes and agencies (e.g., Future Earth and Horizon 2020). Against this backdrop, TDR can be considered a (social) innovation in the academic system, which is currently in the midst of an up-scaling diffusion process from a rather small TDR-advocating expert community to a broader science-practice community. We argue that this up-scaling phase also places TDR in a critical state as the concept potentially risks a type of “rhetorical mainstreaming”. The objectives of this study were to analyse how the challenging approach of TDR is currently adopted and implemented in the field of land-use research and to identify potential influencing factors. We studied 13 transdisciplinary research projects from Germany by performing qualitative interviews with coordinators, document analysis and participatory observation during meetings over a period of five years. Results show that the adoption level of the TDR concept varied widely among the studied projects, as did the adoption of the TDR indicators used in our analysis. In many of the investigated projects, we identified a clear lack of conceptual knowledge of TDR. In addition, we found that current academic structures limit the ability of researchers to thoroughly adapt to the requirements of TDR. We conclude that further communication and educational efforts that promote TDR are required. In addition, we advocate for the development of suitable funding instruments that support sustained research structures.

Given that wolves have been extinct in Germany for approximately 150 years, their return and growing population over the last decade has caused intense discussion and conflict. To develop a widely accepted and just coexistence between humans and wolves, a comprehensive understanding of the conflict is needed. There are indications that the conflict goes beyond dealing with the wolf population and marks a spatial–cultural divide between urban and rural areas. Nevertheless, the social dimensions of the human–wolf conflict in Germany have been little studied. The aim of this paper is to narrow this gap by means of a media discourse analysis including reader comments in order to provide insights into the constituent elements of this conflict. We conducted a qualitative content analysis. The sample comprises articles (n = 63) and reader comments (n = 515) over a period of one year (5/2018-5/2019) from six online periodicals in Germany. The results support the assumption of an urban–rural divide in terms of perspectives and values. The discourse indicates that rural actors who are most affected by the wolves’ vicinity have more negative attitudes towards them. At the same time, they feel abandoned and dominated by urban perspectives and politics. In addition, linkages to right-wing populist positions and conspiracy narratives that can be interpreted as a consequence of political alienation are found.