Second-order cybernetics as a tool to understand why pastoralists do what they do
The notion that pastoralists are irrational managers due to strong adherence to tradition and culture is still common in livestock production sciences. Researchers and development practitioners tend to fall back on this notion when target groups do not adopt their proposed innovations without any obvious reason. It is however difficult to identify innovations that fit into resource-poor systems, and often this lack of fit is the reason why innovations are not taken up. Understanding why pastoralists do what they do, and learning about the constraints they face when regulating production processes, is a prerequisite for identifying viable improvement possibilities.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Chambers, Robert, 1994. "The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(7), pages 953-969, July.
- Joyce Willock & Ian J. Deary & Gareth Edwards-Jones & Gavin J. Gibson & Murray J. McGregor & Alistair Sutherland & J. Barry Dent & Oliver Morgan & Robert Grieve, 1999. "The Role of Attitudes and Objectives in Farmer Decision Making: Business and Environmentally-Oriented Behaviour in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 286-303.
- van Keulen, Herman, 2006. "Heterogeneity and diversity in less-favoured areas," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 1-7, April.
- Defoer, Toon, 2002. "Learning about methodology development for integrated soil fertility management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 57-81, July.
- Girard, N. & Hubert, B., 1999. "Modelling expert knowledge with knowledge-based systems to design decision aids : The example of a knowledge-based model on grazing management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 123-144, February.
- McCown, R. L., 2002. "Locating agricultural decision support systems in the troubled past and socio-technical complexity of `models for management'," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 11-25, October.
- Brodt, Sonja & Klonsky, Karen & Tourte, Laura, 2006. "Farmer goals and management styles: Implications for advancing biologically based agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 90-105, July.
- Keating, B. A. & McCown, R. L., 2001. "Advances in farming systems analysis and intervention," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 70(2-3), pages 555-579.
- Walker, Daniel H., 2002. "Decision support, learning and rural resource management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 113-127, July.
- Herve, D. & Genin, D. & Migueis, J., 2002. "A modelling approach for analysis of agro pastoral activity at the one-farm level," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 187-206, March.
- Kristjanson, P. & Place, F. & Franzel, S. & Thornton, P. K., 2002. "Assessing research impact on poverty: the importance of farmers' perspectives," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 73-92, April.
- Sinclair, F. L. & Walker, D. H., 1998. "Acquiring qualitative knowledge about complex agroecosystems. Part 1: Representation as natural language," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 341-363, March.
- Walker, D. H. & Thorne, P. J. & Sinclair, F. L. & Thapa, B. & Wood, C. D. & Subba, D. B., 1999. "A systems approach to comparing indigenous and scientific knowledge: consistency and discriminatory power of indigenous and laboratory assessment of the nutritive value of tree fodder," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 87-103, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:104:y:2011:i:9:p:655-665. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.