The Role of Affordance Landscapes in Exaptive Innovations

Part of the The Frontiers Collection book series (FRONTCOLL)


A significant part of the current literature considers the representational abilities as the core ingredient of decision-making about innovation. In this chapter, we explore a different type of hypothesis based on the concept of affordance landscape, emphasizing the ability of living beings to prefigure landscapes of potential affordances in order to reach specific goals. The notion of affordance landscape helps us to shed light on the ability of living beings to reconceive, through top-down processes, the existing affordances to discover new uses of artifacts.


Affordance landscape Affordance competition hypothesis Behavioral strategy Exaptation Innovation 


  1. Cisek P (2007) Cortical mechanisms of action selection: the affordance competition hypothesis. Philos Trans Royal Soc B: Biol Sci 362(1485):1585–1599Google Scholar
  2. Clancey WJ (1993) Situated action: a neuropsychological interpretation (response to Vera and Simon). Cognit SciGoogle Scholar
  3. Clancey WJ (1997) Situated cognition: on human knowledge and computer representations. Cambridge University press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Csaszar FA (2018) What makes a decision strategic? Strategic representations. Strateg Sci 3(4):609–619Google Scholar
  5. Felin T, Kauffman S, Mastrogiorgio A, Mastrogiorgio M (2016) Factor markets, actors and affordances. Ind Corp Change 25(1):133–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Felin T, Koenderink J, Krueger JI (2017) Rationality, perception, and the all-seeing eye. Psychon Bull Rev 24(4):1040–1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gavetti G, Levinthal D, Ocasio W (2007) Perspective—Neo-Carnegie: the Carnegie school’s past, present, and reconstructing for the future. Organ Sci 18(3):523–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gibson JJ (1986) The ecological approach to visual perception. Lawrence Erlbaum. (Original work published in 1979)Google Scholar
  9. Gomila T, Calvo P (2008) Directions for an embodied cognitive science: toward an integrated approach. In Calvo P. Gomila T. Handbook of cognitive science. Elsevier, pp 1–25Google Scholar
  10. March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ Sci 2(1):71–87ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Nayak A, Chia R, Canales JI (2019) Non-cognitive microfoundations: understanding dynamic capabilities as idiosyncratically refined sensitivities and predispositions. Acad Manage Rev 45(2):280–303Google Scholar
  12. Newell A, Simon HA (1976) Computer science as empirical inquiry: symbols and search. Commun ACM 19:113–126Google Scholar
  13. Pezzulo G, Cisek P (2016) Navigating the affordance landscape: feedback control as a process model of behavior and cognition. Trends Cognitive Sci 20(6):414–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rietveld E, Kiverstein J (2014) A rich landscape of affordances. Ecol Psychol 26(4):325–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Thagard P (2014) Cognitive science. In Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Fall 2014 edn. Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  16. von Uexküll J (1934) A stroll through the worlds of animals and men. In: Schiller CH (ed) Instinctive behavior: the development of modern concept. International Universities Press, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  17. Wilson M (2002) Six views of embodied cognition. Psychon Bull Rev 9(4):625–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AXESIMT School for Advanced Studies LuccaLuccaItaly
  2. 2.Department of StrategyIE UniversitySegoviaSpain

Personalised recommendations