Overview
Pesticides residue is a well-known issue in China. It happens all the time around our life. The important point is that we cannot avoid its occurrence, because to some extent, it does have certain positive effects to agriculture. Driven by the pursuit of individual health, BAID-China decided to focus on the detection of Pesticide Residues. Thus, we came up with our solution Pestacheck. Alongside of our lab work, the human practices team aim to implement Pestacheck to the society and practice for a greater good of all individuals.
The process of implementing our project is much like visualizing a product. We want our synthetic biology solution Pestacheck to be practical and accessible, not limited to the idea phase. With this in mind, we adopted The Double-Diamond to visual represent the whole process of our human practices (Kochanowska & Gagliardi,2022). The double-diamond contains 4 stages: Discover, Define, Develop and Deliver. We then divided each stage to several modules containing different tasks with details. By following the 4 stages, we are able to convert “unsolved” problems into “solved” problems in the future.
The modules inside each stages are different (as shown in figure 1). Most of the processes of these modules are driven by conversations with relevant stakeholders. Align with iGEM's principle of Human Practices, we have to ensure that our conversations or actions taken are Reflective, Responsible and Responsive. In order to achieve this goal, we set the three-checks model after every single action that we have taken: Check for value (reflective), check for impact (responsible) and check for action (responsive). This model is effective as it encourages us to be integrative and thoughtful, giving us opportunity to be practical and realistic.
In the following section, we will provide a detailed account of how we conceived the plan and made adjustments, with the help of our established frameworks.
Figure 1. Double Diamond Procedure
Figure 2. The three-checks model
Did you know this? The name of the 3-checks model came from our project name: pestaCHECK!
Pre-stage: Stakeholder Analysis
Click the avatars!!!
Our stakeholder analysis aims to identify those individuals and organizations that directly or indirectly affect our pesticide residue detection project, or possibly affected by it. By creating charts that depict the extent of leverage (their ability of amplifying or limiting out project), outcome and engagement priority, we attempt to understand how each group interacts with our project and how our actions can create the greatest shared value to the community.
We categorize stakeholders into five main groups - end-users, producers, sales platforms, regulatory institutions, and researchers - each representing a unique role in the food safety ecosystem. We evaluated their needs, motivations, and potential contributions. This systematic analysis not only guided our technical decisions but also provided a basis for communication and collaboration strategies throughout the project's lifecycle.
| Group | Stakeholder | What They Care About | Leverage | Outcome | Engagement Priority |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| End Users | Health-conscious individuals / Households | Food safety, pesticide residue risk | High | Provide daily self-check tools; enhance household confidence | 4 |
| School cafeteria purchasers / Restaurant chefs | Student safety, procurement transparency | Mid | Ensure public food safety; provide visual inspection records | 3 | |
| Producers | Farmers | Compliance with safety standards, sales prospects | Mid | Help self-check pesticide residues; optimize pesticide use | 3 |
| Sales Platforms | Fresh produce platforms / Supermarkets | Quality control, brand safety | Low | Use results as 'green label' marketing points | 2 |
| Regulatory Institutions | Food and Drug Administration / Agriculture Departments | Food quality supervision, enforcement efficiency | High | Used for community-level checks; supplement regulatory gaps | 4 |
| Researchers | Pesticide residue researchers | Data collection, product feedback | High | Offer user data feedback; assist in algorithm training | 5 |
1. High leverage & high priority
Stakeholders in this category have both strong influence and direct relevance to the development of Pestacheck. We classified the Food and Drug Administration and Agriculture Research Departments, pesticide residue researchers, and health-conscious individuals into this group.
For the Food and Drug Administration and the agricultural research department, they have the final authority to approve our products for market entry and can establish pesticide residue testing standards. For pesticide residue researchers, the current development of pesticide residue testing technology can directly verify the credibility and scientific basis of Pestacheck. For health-conscious individuals, since they generally worry about food safety and the pesticide residues on vegetables and fruits, we firmly believe that they will pay attention to the development of Pestacheck, as it may help improve their quality of life.
Interactions and communications with these groups are necessary, but the conversations might happen at all 4 stages, as suggested in the Double-Diamond Model. These stakeholders will continuously help Pestacheck to develop forward.
Stakeholders in this category have both strong influence and direct relevance to the development of Pestacheck. We classified the Food and Drug Administration and Agriculture Research Departments, pesticide residue researchers, and health-conscious individuals into this group.
For the Food and Drug Administration and the agricultural research department, they have the final authority to approve our products for market entry and can establish pesticide residue testing standards. For pesticide residue researchers, the current development of pesticide residue testing technology can directly verify the credibility and scientific basis of Pestacheck. For health-conscious individuals, since they generally worry about food safety and the pesticide residues on vegetables and fruits, we firmly believe that they will pay attention to the development of Pestacheck, as it may help improve their quality of life.
Interactions and communications with these groups are necessary, but the conversations might happen at all 4 stages, as suggested in the Double-Diamond Model. These stakeholders will continuously help Pestacheck to develop forward.
2. High Leverage & Medium Priority
Farmers are classified in this group. They directly affect the pesticide residue levels, thereby determining the actual food safety condition. Their influence is significant, yet calling upon them requires more resources and incentive measures.
Since they still have high leverage on Pestacheck, the conversation with them is still required. We will primarily contact with them in the Discover stage.
Farmers are classified in this group. They directly affect the pesticide residue levels, thereby determining the actual food safety condition. Their influence is significant, yet calling upon them requires more resources and incentive measures.
Since they still have high leverage on Pestacheck, the conversation with them is still required. We will primarily contact with them in the Discover stage.
3. Medium Leverage & High Priority
Fresh produce platforms / Supermarkets are classified in this group. Although each individual enterprise may not have a significant impact on the promotion and development of Pestacheck, in general, they play a crucial role in shaping consumer behavior and brand perception. These institutions place great importance on the inapplicability of pesticides and are eager to have products that can prove their commitment. Therefore, we must communicate with them, especially in the Discover stage.
Fresh produce platforms / Supermarkets are classified in this group. Although each individual enterprise may not have a significant impact on the promotion and development of Pestacheck, in general, they play a crucial role in shaping consumer behavior and brand perception. These institutions place great importance on the inapplicability of pesticides and are eager to have products that can prove their commitment. Therefore, we must communicate with them, especially in the Discover stage.
4. Medium / Low Leverage & Medium / Low Priority
The Low Leverage & Low Priority stakeholders are mainly low-awareness general consumers. They have currently limited leverage and not urgent for direct engagement. They can be reached later once broader awareness is established.
Raising the awareness of these people toward the issue of pesticide residue is crucial in our socialization part in business plan (Entrepreneurship) and may become a part that we aim to focus in future education part.
The Low Leverage & Low Priority stakeholders are mainly low-awareness general consumers. They have currently limited leverage and not urgent for direct engagement. They can be reached later once broader awareness is established.
Raising the awareness of these people toward the issue of pesticide residue is crucial in our socialization part in business plan (Entrepreneurship) and may become a part that we aim to focus in future education part.
Stage I: Discover
Stage Overview
In order to solve a problem, it is necessary to first understand the problem thoroughly. The goal for Discover Stage is to open up and investigate widely. We collected insights, analyzed relevant stakeholders so that we can listen for the demands from them to reveal the real challenges associated with Pesticide Residue Detection. This stage allows us to understand the needs, not jumping to the solutions directly.
Double Diamond Procedure
Module 1: Social Survey
Check for Value
Conducting social survey is the fastest way to obtain insights from a large-scale of population. In order to gain a brief understanding to people's attitudes and perceptions towards pesticide residues in daily consumed fruits and vegetables, we developed a questionnaire that distributed online via social media platforms commonly used in China. Convenience and voluntary sampling methods were used to collect responses from a diverse range of participants across different age groups and education levels. The diversity in responders offer us an initial picture of the demand size of the problem.
Figure 3. Age distribution of respondents
Figure 4. Education level of respondents
In the question “Have you ever concerned about pesticide residues”, about 85.59% of the respondents expressed concern about the issue of pesticide residues, while 14.41% chose "No". This indicates that the majority of people attach great importance to the problem of pesticide residues.
Figure 5. Concern about pesticide residues
We then investigated how many people have conducted any forms of pesticide residue detection. Among all, 4.5% of the respondents have used it, while 95.5% have not. When compared with the data on concerns about pesticide residues in the second question, it was found that although most people are worried about pesticide residues in their daily lives, they do not have practical solutions.
Figure 6. Detection experience among respondents
The research results reveal two key points: consumers have a very strong concern about pesticide residues, and there is a lack of convenient detection methods. This not only confirms the social significance of our project, but also highlights the gap between professional detection technologies and daily needs.
Check for Action
We first decided to dive into conversations with more relevant stakeholders who face the problem more directly. Then we also came up with a question: Since people have expressed concerns about pesticide residues, why few of them ever conducted detection process? What are the inevitable flaws of the current detection methods? With this question in mind, we move to the next module.
Module 2: Interview in local farms
Check Value
To validate the existence of real user need, we conduct an interview with local farmers near our school. Apart from farming, these farmers also operate open orchards for visitors to participate in the fruit picking process. The farmers were confident about not using pesticides. However, this consequently led to most of their farmland being severely affected by pests, result in the diminishing experience of the tourists. Therefore, they admitted the importance of adopting pesticide within an appropriate level.
Figure 7. Local farm
The farmer told us that once the pesticides are adopted in the future, there must be a strong indicator to suggest that there were no excessive pesticide residues. The farmer expressed strong willingness to adopt an affordable and convenient to demonstrate safety to visitors to their open orchards, especially during farm-picking activities and in market sales. The detection results will act as a strong guarantee of the quality of their fruit.
However, the farmer also implied that the process of the detection can be time-consuming. The time between sending the samples for pesticide residue inspection and receiving the results is a significant cost for farmers who provide fruit and vegetable harvests, as they need to ensure the freshness of the produce. Furthermore, not only the existence of false negative results not only could pose food safety threats, the false positive result might also pose severe harm for the farmers’ reputation and consumer trust.
However, the farmer also implied that the process of the detection can be time-consuming. The time between sending the samples for pesticide residue inspection and receiving the results is a significant cost for farmers who provide fruit and vegetable harvests, as they need to ensure the freshness of the produce. Furthermore, not only the existence of false negative results not only could pose food safety threats, the false positive result might also pose severe harm for the farmers’ reputation and consumer trust.
Figure 8. Interview in local farms
Figure 9. Interview in local farms (continued)
This interview partly answered our previous question. The time cost of pesticide residue detection is one key reason that people hardly conducted detection process though keeping strong concern to the problem. Thus, reducing the time required is a specific point that we have to work on in our future project design. Moreover, the interview has added up to our previous perspective: by solving the issue of pesticide residue, we are no longer merely about providing better detection services to consumers; we are also offering local farmers a practical and reliable guarantee that can safeguard their reputation.
(P.S. Because the farmer uncle requested not to be shown in the photo, we avoid taking pictures of his face. However, we warmly welcome future teams to visit uncle's orchard!)
(P.S. Because the farmer uncle requested not to be shown in the photo, we avoid taking pictures of his face. However, we warmly welcome future teams to visit uncle's orchard!)
Module 3: Interview in morning markets
Check Value
After learning from farmers about their struggles with pest damage and reputation, we moved to a nearby morning market, where the crops produced from the farms will be selling to consumers. This is also the place where producers and consumers will interact directly. We want to explore the intercommunication from both sides of the market.
Check Impact
For the vendors, they claimed basically the same with the farmer that we interviewed before. For the consumers, they admitted more worries associated with pesticide usage on vegetables and also claimed that there is little way to verify whether vegetables truly met safety standards. These concerns coincided with what we have gained from the questionnaire. Interestingly, as we are conducting random interview to the passing-by consumers, there are people that held pessimistic attitude to our project, claiming that a bit of pesticide residue will not have any significant impact on the human body. This piece of view neglected the chronic effect of exposure to pesticide residue, and helped us realized the importance of raising public awareness to the problem first before we socializing our final product. The consumers also expressed concerns about the price of the potential product that we may came up.
Figure 10. Interview in morning markets
Figure 11. Morning market
The morning market street interview offered us more insights outside the questionnaire, especially the voice from the consumers. The lack of public awareness towards the health effect of pesticide residue made us realized that we might face obstacles because of this when socializing and commercializing our final product. Furthermore, the price of our product should within an acceptable scale. This directed us to modify our commercialize plan in the (Entrepreneurship) part.
Stage II: Define
Stage Overview
After discovering the importance of a problem, it is significant for us to synthesize the findings and decide what the core problem is. The define stage focuses on direction and relativity. We interviewed several stakeholders that we have identified in the discover stage to define what exact challenge that we have to address in our project. This is also the stage that we came up with our synthetic biology solution: Pestacheck.
Double Diamond Procedure
Module 1: Interview with Pony Testing
Check Value
After recognizing the crisis in trust between producers and consumers on pesticide residue, we wanted to find a main area to focus on for our project. We decided to take a view of what professional, government-approved and large-scaled pesticide residue detection looks like. Therefore we interviewed a staff member from Pony Testing, a large-scale laboratory that conducts pesticide residue testing using advanced techniques.
Check Impact
The staff member introduced 2 types of detection methods the lab currently using: gas chromatography and spectroscopy. We learned how professional testing ensures accuracy and reliability, providing guarantee and regulation for the vegetables sold on market, but also how the process is lengthy and expensive. The staff told us each of the machine displayed cost over 5 million CNY, not to mention the money needed for their maintenance and repair annually.
Figure 12. Pony Testing Lab
Figure 13. Pony Testing Equipment
Fortunately, the staff introduced us more about the concept of rapid pesticide residue detection. Though we knew the existence of several detection strips on market, we have little idea about the current development of them. We expressed our interest on discovering more about this technology, and asked whether the staff member knew anything about it. The staff member claimed that he did not get in touch with this technology much. But he reminded us that the most obvious flaw with these strips (compared to large-scale detection) is that the results of them cannot be quantified—meaning that consumers cannot determine the concentration of the residues.
Figure 14. Visiting Pony Testing
The insights from PONY Testing guided us to explore alternative rapid detection methods that could be more suitable for field or consumer use. This pushed us toward learning from institutions and companies already working on rapid pesticide residue detection.
Module 2: Interview in Agricultural Academy with a Rapid Detection Company
Check Value
After gaining insights from PONY Testing, we then decided to have an interview with some established rapid pesticide residue detection company. Therefore we took an interview in the China Agricultural Academy with a rapid detection company staff member. Their detection test-strip was developed based on the ELISA technology.
Check Impact
From the introduction, we learned that the ELISA-based pesticide residue detection strip combines antibody–antigen, allowing users to identify the potential presence of harmful pesticide residues without relying on laboratory equipment. However, the staff member also talked about some limitations of this method. Antibodies are highly specific. Different pesticides require different antibodies, and the detection range is limited. Therefore, there are often many types of ELISA test strips that are designed specifically for various types of pesticides. Relying only on this method might exclude smallholders who need simpler, cheaper solutions.
We raised our idea of optimizing the test strip on the market. The staff member suggested us to try another approach of pesticide residue detection: the enzyme inhibition assay. It is a method that began to develop a few years ago, which still exists several drawbacks (Wang et al., 2023).
We raised our idea of optimizing the test strip on the market. The staff member suggested us to try another approach of pesticide residue detection: the enzyme inhibition assay. It is a method that began to develop a few years ago, which still exists several drawbacks (Wang et al., 2023).
Figure 15. Rapid Detection Company Interview
This interview, integrated with the one we conducted with PONY testing, helped us to recognize the competitive situation in the field of food testing where technology is relatively mature. It also explained several risks faced by our project. First, there is market risk: If our positioning is to compete with large research and development institutions for the consumer group of large-scale agricultural product testing organizations, it may fail due to low influence. The second is the risk of a weak value preposition: If one only focuses on the test strips themselves without developing systematic products to enhance convenience, the products may not be favored by the market.
However, knowing the weaknesses of these two detection methods, we are able to find alternative solutions that can outcompete them.
However, knowing the weaknesses of these two detection methods, we are able to find alternative solutions that can outcompete them.
Module 3: Testing with Existing Product
Check Value
After learning about the rapid detection techniques, we soon turned to evaluate the enzyme-inhibition assay and found several products available on the market. Reflecting on the questionnaire we have done before, most people are concerning about the issue of pesticide residue but little have ever purchased or utilized these products. We aim to find out their limitations and major obstacles they encountered when publicizing the products.
Check Impact
Our trials revealed significant weaknesses of the existing test strips. The strips required long, complex handling steps from consumers (it usually requires 10 minutes standing and 5 minutes pressing); their sensitivity was low and easily affected by environmental conditions (such as the hand temperature during pressing); they failed to reflect concentration differences or provide quantifiable results; and the results (shown below) faded rapidly within 10 minutes. These flaws confirmed that while consumer-friendly tools exist, they do not fully address real-world needs, especially for quality-life pursuers.
Figure 16. Testing with Existing Product
The examination of the existing pesticide residue detection strip marks a turning point for our project. We spent large amount of time in order to find a key focus that we can improve on in order to solve the problem we stated at the beginning. This reinforced our decision to anchor our project on test strip optimization—making them simpler, more stable, more sensitive, and capable of delivering clearer, more reliable results. This is where we came up with our solution: Pestacheck.
Stage III: Develop
Stage Overview
If the previous stages happened a little ahead of the wet lab experiments, the develop stage continued align with the processes of wet lab experiments. As a place where we generate and test our synthetic biology design ideas, we let wet lab experiments drive our interviews in this stage. Once an obstacle occurred in wet lab, we immediately reach out to relevant experts to gain potential feedbacks and feasibility checks.
Double Diamond Procedure
Module 1: Interview with Dr. Yang Wen
Check Value
Before we started our experiments in lab, we have identified the key enzyme used in enzyme-inhibition assay detecting pesticide residue ——Acetylcholinesterase. Since we aim to optimize the enzyme, we decided to conduct an in-silico design first. With this in mind, we conducted an interview with Dr. Wen at Chinese Academy of Science.
Check Impact
During the interview, we expressed our struggle on the design of the enzyme optimization process, which is a key for our future engineering process. Dr. Wen introduced us a method called Alanine Scanning. Dr. Wen said that among all amino acids, alanine is a relatively neutral one. By mutating a specific site to alanine, we can analyze the impact of this change on the overall stability of the protein.
Figure 17. Alanine Scanning
According to Dr. Wen's suggestion, our team spent a considerable amount of time learning how to conduct alanine scanning and gradually mastered the usage of the calculation tools. Although we encountered some difficulties at the beginning, we eventually successfully identified five key residues, which became the basis for our mutagenesis experiments in the future. This step marked a starting point of our wet lab engineering, ensuring that the expert's suggestions could be effectively transformed into actionable results in our own projects.
Figure 18. The Alanine Scanning Mutants
Module 2: Interview with Prof. Zhaohua Li on Cell-Free Expression
Check Value
As we continue our work in lab, focusing on the optimization of protein expression, we’ve met numerous obstacles. The reason we consulted Professor Li was due to an actual need in the laboratory: when expressing our mutant acetylcholinesterase in E.coli, we found that most of the proteins were aggregated in the pellet, while only a small amount of proteins remained in the supernatant. This raised serious concerns about protein yield and efficiency, so it was necessary to find a more sustainable and efficient expression system.
Check Impact
We displayed our SDS-PAGE results to Prof. Li and he suggested us to try with Cell-Free Expression. We were a little worried about the time cost, but Prof. Li told us that the expression of the cell-free system was quite fast, basically only taking a few hours.
Check Action
Though we soon took the advice from Prof. Li, we still met some problems when adopting cell-free expression. The positive control we used in the expression system is GFP, it was supposed to show green fluorescence after the reaction, but our sample failed to colorize for a long time. Prof. Li informed us via online that this might be because after the fluorescent protein folded, the low oxygen content in the environment made it failed to form the chromophore, resulting in an incomplete reaction. So during the reaction process, we gently shook the tube and left it at room temperature for enough time to ensure the reaction was complete. With the help of Prof Li, we have successfully solved the problem.
We added the suggestions from Prof. Li in our documentation for the part collection. It could help future teams to operate more efficiently. See https://registry.igem.org/collections/2e4fae2b-aa49-461c-a82f-78a9a7f8c7b5.
We added the suggestions from Prof. Li in our documentation for the part collection. It could help future teams to operate more efficiently. See https://registry.igem.org/collections/2e4fae2b-aa49-461c-a82f-78a9a7f8c7b5.
Figure 19. Interview With Prof. Li
Module 3: Interview with Prof. Rongcheng Han on AuNP Immobilization
Check Value
After the expression of our enzyme, we began to consider its placement on abiotic surface, especially the paper test strip. When we explored ways to enhance the sensitivity and stability of our pesticide detection test strip, we consulted Professor Han. He reminded us that adopting the most cutting-edge methods such as time-gated fluorescence would conflict with our core values of speed, simplicity, and ease of use. Instead, his suggestion of combining AChE with gold nanoparticles (AuNPs), which aligns perfectly with the concept of our project: to improve performance while maintaining practicality.
Check Impact
Introducing an AChE-AuNP composite material provides a reasonable option. It can significantly enhance the detection signal while avoiding the high cost and lengthy development cycle of advanced materials. He also suggested us that instead of traditional paper-based detection strip, we shall develop a colloidal gold strip. As a common type of detection strip adopted in the Covid-19 period, consumers (especially in China) may be more familiar with the usage of these strips. However, we assumed that simpler colloidal gold strips still cannot avoid the subjective errors due to color interpretation differences.
Figure 20. AuNP Immobilization
Figure 21. Colloidal Gold Strip
Motivated by Professor Han's advice, we began to design an experimental plan to conjugate AChE with AuNPs and test its performance compared with the traditional paper-based format. At the same time, his suggestion about adopting colloidal gold strips pushed us to reflect on user familiarity and market acceptance. We therefore planned two goals: exploring the technical feasibility of AChE–AuNP composites, while also considering the usability of colloidal gold formats as a bridge to everyday consumers. To address the subjective error problem existing in every test-strip, we aim to develop a software tool for automatic color identification to quantify the results. These approaches helped us transform his conceptual guidance into actionable steps, keeping our test strip development aligned with both scientific optimization and practical application.
Module 4: Collaboration at CCiC
Check Value
CCiC is an information-sharing platform for most Chinese iGEM teams. We participated in it to gain more insights from various innovative teams on our project and review our design. Observing the operation methods of other teams can help us reflect on our own technical choices, identify potential shortcomings, and verify the effectiveness of our rapid test paper project in terms of feasibility and relevance.
Check Impact
We are lucky to have met a team from Shanghai (ShanghaiTech-China) that also dedicated in designing colloidal gold test strips, just like what Prof. Han have talked to us. Their project targeted on optimizing GZMK-binding proteins which will be integrated on colloidal test strips. We exchanged ideas on how to design a colloidal test strip and they suggested us to try different substrates when implementing the test strip. The binding and decomposition of enzymes and substrates serve as crucial indicators to prove the absence of pesticide residues. If there is a problem with the substrates, it will affect the interpretation of the results. We appreciated their help in the process of test strip design.
Figure 22. CCiC Collaboration
Figure 23. CCiC Collaboration (continued)
After this conversation, we incorporated their suggestions into our strip design process. We tested different base materials and adjusted the placement of enzymes on the strips as well as the binding conditions to enhance reliability and interpretability. Eventually, we chose indophenol acetate, which produces a blue color after enzymatic decomposition. This experience further highlighted the value of peer feedback and demonstrated how collaboration among the team can directly provide guidance for feasible improvements in experimental design. We are extremely grateful to all the teams in CCiC who provided us with suggestions.
Figure 24. Testing substrates
Figure 25. Test Strip Design (continued)
Stage IV: Deliver
Stage Overview
The develop stage exemplifies how we obtain insights from field experts to optimize our solution; the deliver stage then illustrates how we can bring our solution to reality. In this stage, we prepared to share and implemented Pestacheck in order to show its values to potential end-users. We’ve also came up with a business plan to commercialize the product. However, as the existence of time and skills limitation, we are not able to bring the product into the market in reality. Therefore the deliver stage is not over at this point. We hope to make greater impacts using our product in the future.
Double Diamond Procedure
Module 1: Interview with Prof. Zhiyong Luo
Check Value
As lab work came to an end, we began to think about how our work can convert into a real-world application. This interview with Prof. Luo was a turning point which helped us redefined our project goals and refined the product’s application scenario.
Check Impact
Surprisingly, professor Luo reminded us that positioning our rapid test strip directly for household use (C-end)—as what we’ve always suggested before— might not be the most optimal path, as it creates excessive social costs and places unnecessary burdens on consumers. This led us to re-focus on B-end scenarios—farmers and retailer’s self detection—where detection can be done in batches, thus maximizing economic and social value. If we continue to adopt the family-oriented approach, our test strips may find themselves in a situation where they contain theoretical advantages but perform poorly in practical applications. This is because the time and operational costs incurred by individual consumers during use will pose significant obstacles, thereby preventing their widespread adoption.
Figure 26. Interview with Prof. Luo
Figure 27. Prof. Luo's suggestions
We decided to integrate his idea immediately in our business plan. Though we have incorporated farmers and retailers in the stakeholder analysis part shown at the beginning of this page, we labeled them as “mid” in amplifying or limiting the development of our project. If properly positioned, this project will bring tangible benefits to them in the future. For farmers, it can prevent economic losses caused by excessive use of pesticides; for retailers, it provides a cost-effective and efficient screening tool, helping to build consumer trust. We now came to understand that success is not only about technical feasibility but also about embedding our tool into the existing food supply chain. More practices of Prof. Luo’s idea can be found in our Business Plan (Entrepreneurship)
Module 2: Health-conscious individuals / Households feedback
Check Value
As our project neared completion, we aimed to assess how our human practices had influenced real-world cognition. During the initial "Discover" phase, we included a question at the end of the social survey, inviting participants that are interested in participating in the future discussion to leave their contact information. Among all the respondents, a lady who was concerned about food security kindly provided her phone number. At the end of the project, we contacted her again to assess whether our work had had an impact on her understanding of pesticide residue detection.
Check Impact
We reviewed her answer to the social survey before conducting the interview. She held worries to the problem of pesticide residue, but claimed that she never conducted pesticide residue detection at home.
In the interview, she claimed that the reason she had never conducted pesticide residue detection is the cost of time. We therefore shown her our design of Pestacheck, and explained that it could effectively reduce the amount of time cost for detection since it’s a colloidal gold test strip. She expressed great interest and pointed out that the reduction in time requirements makes pesticide testing more feasible in daily life. However, same as what Prof. Luo have told us, she casted doubt on whether people with less health-conscious would also like to use Pestacheck in daily life. We then introduced our detection accuracy and asked her whether she would be feel more at ease if vendors used tests and displayed the results when selling. The answer is positive, and she expressed high praise for our work.
In the interview, she claimed that the reason she had never conducted pesticide residue detection is the cost of time. We therefore shown her our design of Pestacheck, and explained that it could effectively reduce the amount of time cost for detection since it’s a colloidal gold test strip. She expressed great interest and pointed out that the reduction in time requirements makes pesticide testing more feasible in daily life. However, same as what Prof. Luo have told us, she casted doubt on whether people with less health-conscious would also like to use Pestacheck in daily life. We then introduced our detection accuracy and asked her whether she would be feel more at ease if vendors used tests and displayed the results when selling. The answer is positive, and she expressed high praise for our work.
Figure 28. Health-conscious individual feedback
Figure 29. End-user feedback
This follow-up interview enabled us to verify the social feasibility of our design and confirm that accessibility and efficiency are indeed crucial for the end users. Her feedback further emphasized the necessity of balancing scientific reliability with user convenience, which prompted us to further simplify the experimental plan and interface, so as to be used for future tests. This conversation truly validated the correctness of our iterative design concept - connecting laboratory innovation with public acceptance.
Module 3: Interview with the Food and Drug Administration
Check Value
As we began to explore the future commercialization process of the Pestacheck, we realized that merely relying on technical feasibility was not enough to ensure the success or recognition of our product. Therefore, we sought help from the Beijing Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to gain a deeper understanding of the legal and regulatory framework related to pesticide residue detection tools. During the meeting, we presented our business plan and received valuable feedback, emphasizing the importance of including legalization and compliance sections in our proposal.
Check Impact
Through this interview, we realized that even the most innovative products cannot enter the market without obtaining legal authorization and undergoing standardized verification. The officials from the Food and Drug Administration detailed the procedures and certification requirements that products like ours must follow, such as meeting national pesticide testing standards and obtaining potential approval pathways for both consumer and industrial uses. During the meeting, she even directly showed us the relevant laws and regulations. This insight reveals a key flaw in our project plan: although we have focused on the technical and social aspects, we have not yet addressed the regulatory legitimacy issue that determines whether a product can enter the market and gain public trust. Therefore, we plan to incorporate this part into the our business plan.
Figure 30. Food and Drug Administration Interview
Following her advice, we immediately incorporated a legalization part into our business plan. We began to study the relevant national standards and certification systems and included them in our long-term planning. We also plan to consult more regulatory experts in the future to ensure that Pestacheck meets all necessary safety, testing and labeling requirements.
For more information, see Entrepreneurship.
For more information, see Entrepreneurship.
Conclusion
Over the past 5 months of exploration in human practices, we not only check for the value of our solution Pestacheck but also improve on it. Every communication, every feedback, and every unexpected obstacle led us to keep moving forward. Initially, it was just an idea aimed at making pesticide residue detection faster and easier, but then we aim for more—bridging the gap between technology and the real world and make food safety within reach. In summary, with the help of The Double Diamond and 3-checks model, we learned to listen before action, question before design, and reflect before moving forward. This is our understanding to iGEM’s Human Practices principle: reflective, responsible and responsive.
The design of Pestacheck is extremely practical. Every design decision we made was made with great care, and we truly hope it can enter the market someday. For this, we have made a lot of efforts and established a detailed business plan. Although it is not an innovation product that we built from scratch, we have improved it based on the existing foundation and have also made contributions to society.
Our journey will not stop here. Just as the Double Diamond Model shown in the beginning of this page reminds us, innovation is a continuous cycle. After the “Deliver” stage, there will always be more that needs to be improved, more that needs to be verified, and more that needs to reach a wider audience. In the future, we hope to further strengthen communication with our identified stakeholders: households, farmers, regulatory agencies, researchers and retailers, making Pestacheck not only a product, but a joint effort to promote the establishment of a safer and more sustainable food system.
Therefore, we will continue to listen, constantly improve, and keep moving forward.
The design of Pestacheck is extremely practical. Every design decision we made was made with great care, and we truly hope it can enter the market someday. For this, we have made a lot of efforts and established a detailed business plan. Although it is not an innovation product that we built from scratch, we have improved it based on the existing foundation and have also made contributions to society.
Our journey will not stop here. Just as the Double Diamond Model shown in the beginning of this page reminds us, innovation is a continuous cycle. After the “Deliver” stage, there will always be more that needs to be improved, more that needs to be verified, and more that needs to reach a wider audience. In the future, we hope to further strengthen communication with our identified stakeholders: households, farmers, regulatory agencies, researchers and retailers, making Pestacheck not only a product, but a joint effort to promote the establishment of a safer and more sustainable food system.
Therefore, we will continue to listen, constantly improve, and keep moving forward.
References
Kochanowska, M., & Rochacka Gagliardi, W. (2022). The Double Diamond model: In pursuit of simplicity and flexibility. In D. Raposo, et al. (Eds.), Perspectives on design II (pp. xx–xx). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79879-6_2
Fuyal, M., & Giri, B. (2020). A combined system of paper device and portable spectrometer for the detection of pesticide residues. Food Analytical Methods, 13(11), 2071–2078. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-020-01770-y
Wang, Y., Chen, J., Zhang, Z., & Li, X. (2022). Recent advances in rapid detection techniques for pesticide residue: A review. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 70(41), 13093–13117. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79879-6_2
Fuyal, M., & Giri, B. (2020). A combined system of paper device and portable spectrometer for the detection of pesticide residues. Food Analytical Methods, 13(11), 2071–2078. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-020-01770-y
Wang, Y., Chen, J., Zhang, Z., & Li, X. (2022). Recent advances in rapid detection techniques for pesticide residue: A review. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 70(41), 13093–13117. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79879-6_2
