Agricultural Science in the Wild: A Social Network Analysis of Farmer Knowledge Exchange

Abstract

Responding to demands for transformed farming practices requires new forms of knowledge. Given their scale and complexity, agricultural problems can no longer be solved by linear transfers in which technology developed by specialists passes to farmers by way of extension intermediaries. Recent research on alternative approaches has focused on the innovation systems formed by interactions between heterogeneous actors. Rather than linear transfer, systems theory highlights network facilitation as a specialized function. This paper contributes to our understanding of such facilitation by investigating the networks in which farmers discuss science. We report findings based on the study of a pastoral farming experiment collaboratively undertaken by a group of 17 farmers and five scientists. Analysis of prior contact and alter sharing between the group’s members indicates strongly tied and decentralized networks. Farmer knowledge exchanges about the experiment have been investigated using a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods. Network surveys identified who the farmers contacted for knowledge before the study began and who they had talked to about the experiment by 18 months later. Open-ended interviews collected farmer statements about their most valuable contacts and these statements have been thematically analysed. The network analysis shows that farmers talked about the experiment with 192 people, most of whom were fellow farmers. Farmers with densely tied and occupationally homogeneous contacts grew their networks more than did farmers with contacts that are loosely tied and diverse. Thematic analysis reveals three general principles: farmers value knowledge delivered by persons rather than roles, privilege farming experience, and develop knowledge with empiricist rather than rationalist techniques. Taken together, these findings suggest that farmers deliberate about science in intensive and durable networks that have significant implications for theorizing agricultural innovation. The paper thus concludes by considering the findings’ significance for current efforts to rethink agricultural extension.

Using social network analysis to identify key stakeholders in agricultural biodiversity governance and related land-use decisions at regional and local level

“…As an example, interview partners reported that farmers usually closely observe the practices of each other and "tease" each other, for example when one is late with a particular task or when fields are getting "untidy." This fits quite well with an observation made by Wood et al (2014), that farmers' information sources are mainly other farmers, and before they try something new they want to know if fellow farmers are partaking and what their experiences are. Sutherland et al (2012) also found that social relations among farmers plays a crucial role in adopting new farming methods and it has also been shown for the uptake of agri-environmental measures (see Lastra-Bravo et al 2015 for examples).…”

Exploring the role of social capital in influencing knowledge flows and innovation in smallholder farming communities in the Caribbean

“…The characteristics of these networks were quite different, likely reflecting the particular social-ecological characteristics of the community and supporting the need for context-specific approaches to agricultural extension and innovation (Hellin 2012;Wood et al 2014). For example, the farmer knowledge network in Black Bay (Fig.…”

Information networks that generate economic value: A study on clusters of adopters of new or improved technologies and practices among oil palm growers in Mexico

“…Narayanam and Narahari (2011) indicate that the relationships actors establish in a network play an important role in the diffusion of ideas and information. While extensionists are important they are often not the firstly ranked information source which are generally other farmers and input dealers (Sligo et al, 2005;Solano et al, 2003;Wood et al, 2014;Thuo et al, 2014). Different studies have found different effects of links with extension agents on adoption of new or improved technologies and practices.…”