Rhythms of the herd: Long term dynamics in seed choice by Indian farmers

Stone, Geoffrey R.; Flachs, Andrew; Diepenbrock, Christine H.

doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2013.10.003

Cited by 37 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bt cotton, much maligned and praised, demonstrates many of India's agro-environmental paradoxes: the promise of high-tech modernity as well as the threat of eroded past values (Paarlberg 2001;Pearson 2006;Scoones 2008;Shiva 1997;Stone 2002); the influx of new capital and technology amid the danger of increased corporate control (Bagla and Stone 2012;Jasanoff 2005;Newell 2003;Schurman and Munro 2010;Scoones 2006); and the acquisition of new farming methods at the risk of interrupting the farming learning process (Stone 2007;Stone, Flachs, and Diepenbrock 2014). "You have to change seeds each year", Telangana farmer Arun 5 told me -"…the new seeds have the best science."…”

Section: Genetically Modified Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As of 2013, the vast majority (Table 1) (Figure 2). Stone (2007) called transient spikes in seed-buying behavior "fads", where as many as 80% of farmers would buy single brands only to abandon them in a three-year cycle (Stone, Flachs, and Diepenbrock 2014). Unable to keep track of these ever-changing, confusingly-labeled, and unpredictably performing seeds, farmers over-relied on social emulation and copied the seed choices of their neighbors.…”

Section: Genetically Modified Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Available Bt seed brands jumped from four to fifty-one in 2005 and continued to grow every year since ( Table 1), meaning that by 2012 when my study began, individual farmers could expect to see at least several hundred seed brands in a given shop. What manifested first as village-wide fads became more intense, district-wide fads by 2012, a phenomenon Stone et al call "herding behavior" (Stone, Flachs, and Diepenbrock 2014). Seed herding has emerged from the dynamics between cotton farmers, but state government actions can also influence farmer decision-making.…”

Section: Journal Of Political Ecologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Anna Tsing (2005) has described the impact of capitalism at its margins as an awkward friction, giving rise to the myriad contradictions seen when technologies are confronted and reappropriated: the introduction of soap in Zimbabwe requiring new conceptions of hygiene and status (Burke 1996); fertilizers and pesticides reimagined in India as part of an Ayurvedic understanding of plant health (Gupta 1998;Vasavi 1999); the invocation of spirits when confronted with the cold working relationships in foreign-owned firms in Bolivia (Taussig 1980) or Malaysia (Ong 2010); and now the widespread breakdown in knowledge regarding seeds intended to improve environmental sustainability through decreased pesticide sprays (Stone, Flachs, and Diepenbrock 2014). GM and organic methods, like other technologies, must first be negotiated at the frontier of capitalism and made meaningful if they are to have staying power.…”

Section: Making Sense Of New Avenues For Success Within Organic and Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Attempting to separate truth from fiction in a vast, poorly-understood seed market, most farmers are unable to trial and assess new technology quickly enough to draw upon their personal experience when choosing which seeds to plant. Since 2002, seeds have remained popular for an average of only three years (Stone, Flachs, and Diepenbrock 2014). Given that intimate local ecological knowledge has been shown to be crucial to sustainability, the GM seed market appears to be eroding, rather than building local efforts at sustainability.…”

Section: Making Sense Of New Avenues For Success Within Organic and Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Redefining success: the political ecology of genetically modified and organic cotton as solutions to agrarian crisis

Flachs

2016

Journal of Political Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The transnational spread of law and technology in Indian agricultural development has passed through three distinct phases since the mid-19 th century. In each case, a narrative of agrarian crisis allowed for new state and corporate interventions, conceived by American and British agribusiness, within the existing logics of Indian smallholder agriculture. These begun with colonial British industrial cotton projects in the 1840s, continuing with Green Revolution agriculture, and on contemporary GM and organic cotton farms. In each case, farmers developed strategies through a frictive, contentious adoption of new technologies and built new avenues to success that worked for some farmers and failed for others. In this article I draw on ethnographic fieldwork and household surveys conducted in nine villages from 2012-2014 in Telangana, India. As with previous development initiatives, the US-born legal structures that defined high-tech GM and low-tech organic agriculture were adopted in India without major changes. I argue, however that their actual implementation by farmers has required a significant shift in the ways that people manage the agricultural economy. Keywords: Genetically Modified crops, organic agriculture, development, South India RésuméLa diffusion transnationale de droit et de la technologie dans le développement agricole indien a passé par trois phases distinctes depuis le milieu du 19ème siècle. Dans chaque cas, un récit de la crise agraire a permis de nouvelles interventions de l'Etat et des entreprises, conçu par l'agro-industrie américaine et britannique, dans les logiques existantes de la petite agriculture indienne. Ceux-ci commencé avec des projets de coton industriel britanniques dans les années 1840, la poursuite de la révolution verte, et avec l'utilisation contemporaine des variétés GM et le coton biologique. Dans chaque cas, les agriculteurs ont développé des stratégies grâce à une adoption controversée de nouvelles technologies et construit de nouvelles avenues à succès qui ont travaillé pour certains agriculteurs et échoué pour d'autres. Dans cet article, je tire sur des enquêtes de terrain et des ménages ethnographiques menées dans neuf villages 2012-2014 dans Telangana, en Inde. Comme avec les initiatives de développement antérieures, les structures juridiques des États-Unis qui ont défini de haute technologie (GM) et low-tech (agriculture biologique) ont été adoptées en Inde sans changements majeurs. Je soutiens cependant que leur mise en oeuvre par les agriculteurs a nécessité un changement important dans la façon dont les gens gèrent l'économie agricole. Mots-clés: cultures génétiquement modifiées, l'agriculture biologique, le développement, Inde du Sud ResumenLa difusión transnacional de las leyes y la tecnología en el desarrollo agrícola en India ha tenido tres fases desde la mitad del siglo XIX. En cada caso, una narrativa de crisis agraria permitió nuevas intervenciones estatales y corporativas, concebidas por la industria agraria estadounidense y británica, en la lógi...

show abstract

Section: Genetically Modified Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Genetically Modified Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Journal Of Political Ecologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Making Sense Of New Avenues For Success Within Organic and Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Making Sense Of New Avenues For Success Within Organic and Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Redefining success: the political ecology of genetically modified and organic cotton as solutions to agrarian crisis

Flachs

2016

Journal of Political Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Domain A: Rights and Access to Nature—Land, Water, Seeds and Biodiversity

Anderson

Bruil²,

Chappell

et al. 2020

Agroecology Now!

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter discusses a seemingly obvious but often underappreciated reality—without secure land tenure as well as access to and control over other elements of natural ecosystems, agroecology specifically, and the sustainable livelihoods of food producers more generally, will be impossible. We review how the access and control over water, ecosystem, cultivated biodiversity, seeds, breeds and soil amongst other aspects of nature enable agroecology. Conversely, we review the disabling conditions in this domain where inadequate and insecure access and tenure rights for various elements of natural ecosystems increase vulnerability, hunger and poverty and undermine agroecology. Insecure rights and access to nature provides little incentive for farmers, communities and territorial networks to invest in long-term agroecological approaches.

show abstract