Connecting urban agriculture with design thinking: a case study from Zimbabwe

References

• Ballouard, J.-M., Brischoux, F., & Bonnet, X. (2011). Children prioritize virtual exotic biodiversity over local biodiversity. PloS One, 6(8), e23152. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023152
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbour, R. S., & Morgan, D. L. (2017). A new era in focus group research: Challenges, innovation and practice. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bazzano, A. N., Martin, J., Hicks, E., Faughnan, M., & Murphy, L. (2017). Human-centred design in global health: A scoping review of applications and contexts. PloS One, 12(11), e0186744. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186744
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beierle, T. C. (2010). Democracy in practice: Public participation in environmental decisions. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• BirdLife International. (2015). Protecting Harare’s wetland ecosystems for nature and the city’s people. https://www.birdlife.org/worldwide/project/protecting-harare%E2%80%99s-wetland-ecosystems-nature-and-city%E2%80%99s-people
   Google Scholar
• Bjögvinsson, E., Ehn, P., & Hillgren, P.-A. (2012). Design things and design thinking: Contemporary participatory design challenges. Design Issues, 28(3), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blyth, S., Kimbell, L., & Haig, T. (2011). Design thinking and the big society: From solving personal troubles to designing social problems. Actant and Taylor Haig.
   Google Scholar
• Bousset, J.-P., Macombe, C., & Taverne, M. (2005). Participatory methods, guidelines and good practice guidance to be applied throughout the project to enhance problem definition, co-learning, synthesis and dissemination (SEAMLESS Report No. 10). SEAMLESS.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, W., Uebernickel, F., & Abrell, T. (2016). Design thinking as mindset, process, and toolbox. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2019). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. (Vol. 20091). HarperBusiness.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design thinking for social innovation. Development Outreach, 12(1), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1596/1020-797X_12_1_29
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan, R. (2010). Wicked problems in design thinking. Kepes, 7(6), 7–35.
   Google Scholar
• Carey, M. A., & Asbury, J.-E. (2016). Focus group research (Vol. 9). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Carlgren, L., Elmquist, M., & Rauth, I. (2016). The challenges of using design thinking in industry–experiences from five large firms. Creativity and Innovation Management, 25(3), 344–362. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, E., Leos, C., Kowitt, S. D., & Moracco, K. E. (2020). Enhancing community-based participatory research through Human-Centered design strategies. Health Promot Pract, 21(1), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839919850557
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chick, A. (2012). Design for social innovation: Emerging principles and approaches. Iridescent, 2(1), 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/19235003.2012.11428505
   Google Scholar
• Coenen, M., Stamm, T. A., Stucki, G., & Cieza, A. (2012). Individual interviews and focus groups in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A comparison of two qualitative methods. Quality of Life Research, 21(2), 359–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9943-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corner, A., Markowitz, E., & Pidgeon, N. (2014). Public engagement with climate change: The role of human values. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5(3), 411–422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creighton, J. L. (2005). The public participation handbook: Making better decisions through citizen involvement. John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011). The case study approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11(1), 100. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidson, S., McLean, C., Treanor, S., Aitken, M., Cunningham-Burley, S., Laurie, G., Sethi, N., & Pagliari, C. (2013). Public acceptability of data sharing between the public, private and third sectors for research purposes. Scottish Government Social Research.
   Google Scholar
• Dickinson, J. L., Shirk, J., Bonter, D., Bonney, R., Crain, R. L., Martin, J., Phillips, T., & Purcell, K. (2012). The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6), 291–297. https://doi.org/10.1890/110236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehler, C., Zaucha, J., & Gee, K. (2019). Maritime/marine spatial planning at the interface of research and practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Enarson, E., & Chakrabarti, P. D. (2009). Women, gender and disaster: Global issues and initiatives. SAGE Publications India.
   Google Scholar
• Flick, U., Garms-Homolová, V., Herrmann, W. J., Kuck, J., & Röhnsch, G. (2012). I can’t prescribe something just because someone asks for it…” Using mixed methods in the framework of triangulation. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437183
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedrich, L. A., Jefferson, R., & Glegg, G. (2014). Public perceptions of sharks: Gathering support for shark conservation. Marine Policy, 47, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2014.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glen, R., Suciu, C., Baughn, C. C., & Anson, R. (2015). Teaching design thinking in business schools. The International Journal of Management Education, 13(2), 182–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2015.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halvorsen, K. E. (2006). Critical next steps in research on public meetings and environmental decision making. Human Ecology Review, 13(2), 150–160.
   Google Scholar
• He, B., & Thøgersen, S. (2010). Giving the people a voice? Experiments with consultative authoritarian institutions in China. Journal of Contemporary China, 19(66), 675–692. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2010.485404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillgren, P.-A., Seravalli, A., & Emilson, A. (2011). Prototyping and infrastructuring in design for social innovation. CoDesign, 7(3–4), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2011.630474
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iatu, C., & Eva, M. (2016). Spatial profile of the evolution of urban sprawl pressure on the surroundings of Romanian cities (2000–2013). Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences, 11(1), 79–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ives, C. D., Abson, D. J., von Wehrden, H., Dorninger, C., Klaniecki, K., & Fischer, J. (2018). Reconnecting with nature for sustainability. Sustainability Science, 13(5), 1389–1397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0542-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ives, C. D., Giusti, M., Fischer, J., Abson, D. J., Klaniecki, K., Dorninger, C., Laudan, J., Barthel, S., Abernethy, P., Martín-López, B., Raymond, C. M., Kendal, D., & von Wehrden, H. (2017). Human–nature connection: A multidisciplinary review. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26-27, 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jayasekara, R. S. (2012). Focus groups in nursing research: Methodological perspectives. Nursing Outlook, 60(6), 411–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2012.02.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kameri-Mbote, P. (2007). Access, control and ownership: Women and sustainable environmental management in Africa. Agenda, 21(72), 36–46.
   Google Scholar
• Kellert, S. R. (2012). Building for life: Designing and understanding the human-nature connection. Island press.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar, A., Lodha, D., Mahalingam, A., Prasad, V., & Sahasranaman, A. (2016). Using ‘design thinking’ to enhance urban re-development: A case study from India. Engineering Project Organization Journal, 6(2–4), 155–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/21573727.2016.1155445
   Google Scholar
• Lannas, K. (2013). Marlborough wetlands: A very public meeting. Harare News. http://www.hararenews.co.zw/2013/11/marlborough-wetlands-a-very-public-meeting/
   Google Scholar
• Leverenz, C. S. (2014). Design thinking and the wicked problem of teaching writing. Computers and Composition, 33, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2014.07.001
   Google Scholar
• Luyet, V., Schlaepfer, R., Parlange, M. B., & Buttler, A. (2012). A framework to implement stakeholder participation in environmental projects. Journal of Environmental Management, 111, 213–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.06.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McComas, K. A. (2003). Trivial pursuits: Participant views of public meetings. Journal of Public Relations Research, 15(2), 91–115. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1502_1
   Google Scholar
• McKinley, D. C., Miller-Rushing, A. J., Ballard, H. L., Bonney, R., Brown, H., Cook-Patton, S. C., Evans, D. M., French, R. A., Parrish, J. K., Phillips, T. B., Ryan, S. F., Shanley, L. A., Shirk, J. L., Stepenuck, K. F., Weltzin, J. F., Wiggins, A., Boyle, O. D., Briggs, R. D., Chapin, S. F., … Soukup, M. A. (2017). Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management, and environmental protection. Biological Conservation, 208, 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaverty, P. (2017). Public participation and innovations in community governance. Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Meier, J. J., & Miller, R. K. (2016). Turning the revolution into an evolution: The case for design thinking and rapid prototyping in libraries. College & Research Libraries News, 77(6), 283–286.
   Google Scholar
• Melles, G., de Vere, I., & Misic, V. (2011). Socially responsible design: Thinking beyond the triple bottom line to socially responsive and sustainable product design. CoDesign, 7(3–4), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2011.630473
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills, A. J., Durepos, G., & Wiebe, E. (2009). Encyclopedia of case study research. Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Naiman, L. (2016). Design thinking as a strategy for innovation. Creativity at work.
   Google Scholar
• Nhamo, G. (2017). New global sustainable development agenda: A focus on. Sustainable Development, 25(3), 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1648
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41(5), 715–740. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916508318748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nurkka, P., Kujala, S., & Kemppainen, K. (2009). Capturing users’ perceptions of valuable experience and meaning. Journal of Engineering Design, 20(5), 449–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820903158835
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborn, D., Cutter, A., & Ullah, F. (2015). Universal sustainable development goals. Understanding the transformational challenge for developed countries. Stakeholder Forum.
   Google Scholar
• Pavelin, K., Pundir, S., & Cham, J. A. (2014). Ten simple rules for running interactive workshops. PLoS Computational Biology, 10(2), e1003485. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003485
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plattner, H., Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (2012). Design thinking research. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Plattner, H., Meinel, C., & Weinberg, U. (2009). Design-thinking. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Prado, C. (2019). Just community participation and Border environmental governance: A view from the Border 2020 program. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 21(6), 662–613. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2019.1665991
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417–2431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed, M. S., Vella, S., Challies, E., de Vente, J., Frewer, L., Hohenwallner-Ries, D., Huber, T., Neumann, R. K., Oughton, E. A., Sidoli del Ceno, J., & van Delden, H. (2018). A theory of participation: What makes stakeholder and public engagement in environmental management work?Restoration Ecology, 26, S7–S17. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12541
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, N. (2004). Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation. The American Review of Public Administration, 34(4), 315–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074004269288
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 25(1), 3–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2004). Evaluating public-participation exercises: A research agenda. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 29(4), 512–556.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheedy, A., MacKinnon, M. P., Pitre, S., & Watling, J. (2008). Handbook on citizen engagement: Beyond consultation.
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, V. (2016). The violence of the green revolution: Third world agriculture, ecology, and politics. University Press of Kentucky.
   Google Scholar
• Soga, M., & Gaston, K. J. (2016). Extinction of experience: The loss of human–nature interactions. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14(2), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanford d.school. (2009). Steps in a design thinking process. https://dschool-old.stanford.edu/groups/k12/revisions/17cff/6/
   Google Scholar
• Stern, M. J., Powell, R. B., & Ardoin, N. M. (2008). What difference does it make? Assessing outcomes from participation in a residential environmental education program. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(4), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.39.4.31-43
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabernero, C., & Hernández, B. (2011). Self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation guiding environmental behavior. Environment and Behavior, 43(5), 658–675. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916510379759
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tausch, A. P., & Menold, N. (2016). Methodological aspects of focus groups in health research: Results of qualitative interviews with focus group moderators. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 3, 2333393616630466. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333393616630466
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Linden, S. (2015). Intrinsic motivation and pro-environmental behaviour. Nature Climate Change, 5(7), 612–613. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2669
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Linden, S., Maibach, E., & Leiserowitz, A. (2015). Improving public engagement with climate change: Five “best practice” insights from psychological Science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 758–763. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615598516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Eeuwijk, P., & Angehrn, Z. (2017). How to conduct a Focus Group Discussion (FGD). Methodological Manual. Retrieved from Vasel.
   Google Scholar
• von Thienen, J., Meinel, C., & Nicolai, C. (2014). How design thinking tools help to solve wicked problems. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research (pp. 97–102). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, B., van der Plank, S., & Behrens, P. (2017). The effect of community consultation on perceptions of a proposed mine: A case study from southeast Australia. Resources Policy, 51, 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2016.12.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynn, D. C., & Eckert, C. M. (2017). Perspectives on iteration in design and development. Research in Engineering Design, 28(2), 153–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0226-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, J., & Leung, M-y. (2015). Exploring factors of preparing public engagement for large-scale development projects via a focus group study. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1124–1135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.01.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, W., Goodale, E., & Chen, J. (2014). How contact with nature affects children’s biophilia, biophobia and conservation attitude in China. Biological Conservation, 177, 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.06.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar