IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bwp/bwppap/esid-116-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The interplay of ideas, institutional innovations and organisational structures: Insights from group farming in India

Author

Listed:
  • Bina Agarwal

Abstract

An innovative development programme requires ideas at multiple stages, from conception to implementation. Where do these ideas come from, and how do they shape institutional and organisational structures? A recent debate on ideas has focused more on their role in framing public policy, than on their role in designing institutions or the organisational structures needed for the successful functioning of those institutions. Moreover, this debate mostly concerns political institutions in developed countries, and ideas mooted by experts. In contrast, a much older body of work on participatory development emphasises the need for planners to design policy in interaction with local communities, taking account of ideas emerging from ordinary people whom the policies will affect. But what kinds of organisational forms can enable villager participation in policy formulation and ensure the creation of viable institutions? This paper analyses the interplay between ideas, institutions, and organisational structures, using, as an example, an unusual institutional innovation, namely group farming by women in two states of India – Telangana and Kerala. Based especially on the author’s interviews with those who shaped and implemented these programmes in each state, it traces how the idea of group farming for poverty alleviation and women’s empowerment emerged; how it differed from the historical examples of collective farming globally; and the thinking behind different elements of programme implementation. Although both states focused on group farming, they diverged notably in their ideas about group formation and composition, and the organisational form needed for implementation. The paper traces these differences, and their effect on the economic and social performance of the groups, as well as on institutional sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Bina Agarwal, 2019. "The interplay of ideas, institutional innovations and organisational structures: Insights from group farming in India," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series esid-116-19, GDI, The University of Manchester.
  • Handle: RePEc:bwp:bwppap:esid-116-19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.effective-states.org/wp-content/uploads/working_papers/final-pdfs/esid_wp_116_agarwal.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Biggs, Stephen D. & Clay, Edward J., 1981. "Sources of innovation in agricultural technology," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 321-336, April.
    2. Bina Agarwal & Bruno Dorin, 2017. "Group farming in France: Why are some regions more conducive to cooperation than others?," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 132017, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    3. Raup, Philip M., 1975. "French Experience With Group Farming: The Gaec," Staff Papers 13854, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    4. Agarwal, Bina, 2018. "Can group farms outperform individual family farms? Empirical insights from India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 57-73.
    5. Lin, Justin Yifu, 1990. "Collectivization and China's Agricultural Crisis in 1959-1961," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1228-1252, December.
    6. James Kung & Louis Putterman, 1997. "China's collectivisation puzzle: A new resolution," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(6), pages 741-763.
    7. Freeman, Chris & Louca, Francisco, 2002. "As Time Goes By: From the Industrial Revolutions to the Information Revolution," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199251056.
    8. Erik Mathijs & Johan F. M. Swinnen, 2001. "Production Organization And Efficiency During Transition: An Empirical Analysis Of East German Agriculture," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(1), pages 100-107, February.
    9. Sabates-Wheeler, Rachel, 2002. "Farm Strategy, Self-Selection and Productivity: Can Small Farming Groups Offer Production Benefits to Farmers in Post-Socialist Romania?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(10), pages 1737-1753, October.
    10. Sansom, Robert L, 1969. "The Motor Pump: A Case Study of Innovation and Development," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 109-121, March.
    11. Agarwal, Bina, 2013. "Gender and Green Governance: The Political Economy of Women's Presence Within and Beyond Community Forestry," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199683024.
    12. Lerman, Zvi & Ruben, Ruerd, 2005. "Why Nicaraguan Peasants Remain in Agricultural Production Cooperatives," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19243, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Raymond Apthorpe, 1972. "Co‐operatives in Rural Africa," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 11(3), pages 150-161, July.
    14. Swain,Nigel, 1985. "Collective Farms which Work?," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521268530.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bina Agarwal, 2020. "Labouring for Livelihoods: Gender, Productivity and Collectivity," The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Springer;The Indian Society of Labour Economics (ISLE), vol. 63(1), pages 21-37, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Agarwal, Bina, 2018. "Can group farms outperform individual family farms? Empirical insights from India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 57-73.
    2. Bina Agarwal & Bruno Dorin, 2019. "Group farming in France: Why do some regions have more cooperative ventures than others?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(3), pages 781-804, May.
    3. Bina Agarwal & Bruno Dorin, 2017. "Group farming in France: Why are some regions more conducive to cooperation than others?," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 132017, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    4. Bina Agarwal, 2015. "Food Security, Productivity, and Gender Inequality," Working Papers id:7566, eSocialSciences.
    5. Swinnen, Johan F.M., 2005. "Agricultural transformation: Lessons from experience," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 44(1), pages 1-20, March.
    6. Johan F.M. Swinnen & Liesbet Vranken, 2007. "Patterns of Land Market Developments in Transition," LICOS Discussion Papers 17907, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    7. Laurence Amblard & J.P. Colin, 2009. "Reverse tenancy in Romania: Actors' rationales and equity outcomes," Post-Print hal-00454533, HAL.
    8. Bai, Ying & Kung, James Kai-sing, 2014. "The shaping of an institutional choice: Weather shocks, the Great Leap Famine, and agricultural decollectivization in China," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-26.
    9. Scott Rozelle & Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2004. "Success and Failure of Reform: Insights from the Transition of Agriculture," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(2), pages 404-456, June.
    10. Sauer, Johannes & Balint, Borbala, 2006. "Romanian Maize - Distorted Prices and Producer Efficiency," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21410, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Shengmin Sun & Qiang Chen, 2014. "Measuring the Effects of Decollectivization on China's Agricultural Growth: A Panel GMM Approach, 1970-1987," SDU Working Papers 2014-05, School of Economics, Shandong University.
    12. Bina Agarwal, 2020. "Labouring for Livelihoods: Gender, Productivity and Collectivity," The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Springer;The Indian Society of Labour Economics (ISLE), vol. 63(1), pages 21-37, March.
    13. Axel WOLZ & Shemei ZHANG & Ya DING, 2020. "Agricultural production cooperatives and agricultural development: Is there a niche after all? Findings from an exploratory survey in China," CIRIEC Working Papers 2004, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    14. Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2009. "Reforms, globalization, and endogenous agricultural structures," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(s1), pages 719-732, November.
    15. Gass, Graham & Biggs, Stephen & Kelly, Aiden, 1997. "Stakeholders, science and decision making for poverty-focused rural mechanization research and development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 115-126, January.
    16. Muller, Malte & Rommel, Jens, 2018. "Should I Stay or Should I Go? A Behavioral Approach to Organizational Choice in Tajikistan’s Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(3), September.
    17. Ziad Rotaba & Catherine Beaudry, 2012. "How Do High, Medium, And Low Tech Firms Innovate? A System Of Innovation (Si) Approach," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(05), pages 1-23.
    18. Tambo, Justice A. & Wünscher, Tobias, 2016. "Beyond adoption: welfare effects of farmer innovation behavior in Ghana," Discussion Papers 235297, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    19. Marco Gallegati, 2019. "A system for dating long wave phases in economic development," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 803-822, July.
    20. Evans, Alecia & Sesmero, Juan, 2022. "Cooperation in Social Dilemmas with Correlated Noisy Payoffs: Theory and Experimental Evidence," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 322804, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bwp:bwppap:esid-116-19. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Rowena Harding (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wpmanuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.