Exploring Knowledge-Cultures: Precision Farming, Yield Mapping, and the Expert–Farmer Interface

Abstract

Over recent years the concept of ‘knowledge’ in the singular has been increasingly challenged by ideas of differentiated, contextualized ‘knowledges’. In this paper we propose the concept of ‘knowledge-cultures’ as a way of exploring the fluidity of diverse forms of knowledge and the rules, norms, and values that enable or constrain their production. Elaborating on Shotter's idea of knowledge-from-within, we argue that knowledge-cultures are social achievements that equip those who embody them with a relational–responsive kind of understanding of events and surroundings built on multiple knowledge-forms. To explore this contextual nature of knowledge-culture construction and illustrate our arguments, we draw on detailed empirical research of farmers' experiences with the precision-farming technique of yield mapping in the English counties of Lincolnshire and Suffolk.

Are farmers in England equipped to meet the knowledge challenge of sustainable soil management? An analysis of farmer and advisor views

“…More generally farmers regard their own knowledge in managing the environment as very important and often undervalued (Wilson 1997;Harrison et al1998;Seymour et al1998). They place high value on their experience and use this as their primary source of knowledge for management decisions (Contant 1990;Fearne 1991;Lyon 1996;Tsouvalis et al 2000). A growing literature in other countries (Romig et al 1995;Walter et al 1997;Bruyn and Abbey 2003) also demonstrates that farmers have considerable knowledge of their own soil, are able to identify characteristics of soil quality and have developed a rich vocabulary to describe it (van der Ploeg 1989;Liebig and Doran 1999;Romig et al 1995;Tsouvalis et al 2000;van Rompaey 2001;Curtis et al 2003).…”

“…Conceptual approaches to understanding farmers' knowledge in relation to natural resource management have a broad base drawing both on behavioural (Napier et al 1984;Lichtenberg and Zimmerman 1999;Ryan et al 2003) and cultural approaches (Carr and Tait 1991;Long 1992;McEachern 1992;Harrison et al 1998;Tsouvalis et al 2000;Burton 2004); as well as on perspectives that relate knowledge to social and experiential learning (Lyon 1996;Röling and Wagemaker 2000;Russell and Ison 2001 (Röling and Jiggins 1994;Park et al 1997;Tebrugge and Bohrnsen 2001;Coughenour 2003). Implementing these highly technical practices is thought to require some understanding of the underpinning scientific principles and physical processes (Vanclay and Lawrence 1994;Pretty 1995).…”

“…They operate highly technical arable systems incorporating advanced technologies (Ward 1995;Tsouvalis et al 2000) and demonstrate adaptations, practical solutions and produce experimental knowledge, sometimes using scientific method (Wilson 1997;Harrison et al 1998;Tsouvalis et al 2000).…”

Understanding the influence of farmer motivations on changes to soil erosion risk on sites of former serious erosion in the South Downs National Park, UK

“…Prager and Posthumus (2010) have outlined three paradigms used to identify and account for socioeconomic motivations to conserve soils -the economic constraint paradigm (popular particularly in early US studies), the innovation-diffusion-adoption paradigm (where information is key, based on the work of Rogers (1995)) and the adopter-perception paradigm; frameworks predicated on ideas of social connectivity (e.g. social capital - Sobels et al, 2001) and knowledge cultures (Tsouvalis et al, 2000) might also be added here. All are informed by how farmers themselves understand their soils, particularly vis-à-vis scientific perspectives (Baginetas, 2008;Ingram et al, 2010;Duruiheoma, et al, 2015), and with reference to cultural norms and social symbolism (e.g.…”

Studies on Domestic and Overseas in Research Progress of Agricultural Information Technologies

“…Three of the five are connected rather directly to the digital economy and the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs): digital technology, entrepreneurship, and human capital. The new agriculture also exploits new technologies and assembles them (GPS, databases and geographic information systems) into precision agriculture to optimize agricultural inputs to specific locations, perhaps with little involvement of farmers' themselves [19].…”