IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/millen/v1y2010i2p197-214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Communication and the Construction of Local Knowledge in Thai Rice Farming Villages

Author

Listed:
  • Jude William R. Genilo

Abstract

The study asserts that rural villages which have developed relatively complex communication systems have extensive local knowledge and practice systems. Using the knowledge and community-based perspective, the study departs from past works of development communication scholars, who have focused their attention mainly on the transfer of information. The study is concerned with how meaning is created and shared in rural communities through the use of communication. It looks at how small homogenous farming communities in Thailand – world’s number one rice exporter – utilize communication to improve rice crop production. It asks: what roles does communication play in the formation of collective definitions (perspectives) and the construction/management of local knowledge and practices on rice farming? To explore the plausibility of this paper’s assertion, ethnographies of two rice farming villages were conducted – Baan Sap Som Boon (irrigated) in Chainat province (Central Region) and Baan Hua Hae (rainfed) in Ubon Ratchathani province (Northeast Region). Data generation period was from October 2004 to July 2005. Research results indicate that Baan Sap Som Boon has both an extensive knowledge of rice farming methods and procedures and an elaborate community-based communication system. Baan Hua Hae, on the other hand, practices more traditional means of rice production and divides time with other livelihood activities. In both villages, communication plays a central role in improving crop production via facilitating the formation of collective definitions on rice farming, labor, economics and agriculture-related institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jude William R. Genilo, 2010. "Communication and the Construction of Local Knowledge in Thai Rice Farming Villages," Millennial Asia, , vol. 1(2), pages 197-214, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:millen:v:1:y:2010:i:2:p:197-214
    DOI: 10.1177/097639961000100203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/097639961000100203
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/097639961000100203?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2008. "Matching demand and supply in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure: Experiences with innovation intermediaries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 260-276, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    2. Sergio Ochoa Jiménez & Gimena Vianey Cervantes Hurtado & Carlos Armando Jacobo Hernández & José Guadalupe Flores López, 2020. "Knowledge and Innovation in Mexican Agricultural Organizations," Economies, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-12, November.
    3. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    4. Čikić, Jovana & Petrović, Živojin, 2013. "Diffusion Of Knowledge And Innovations In Serbian Agriculture," Agri-Food Sector in Serbia: State and Challenges, Serbian Association of Agricultural Economists, number 157553 edited by Škorić, Dragan & Tomić, Danilo & Popović, Vesna, December.
    5. Eligio Malusà & Ewa M. Furmanczyk & Małgorzata Tartanus & Gerjan Brouwer & Claude-Eric Parveaud & François Warlop & Markus Kelderer & Jutta Kienzle & Evelyne Alcazar Marin & Teun Dekker & Radek Vávra , 2022. "Knowledge Networks in Organic Fruit Production across Europe: A Survey Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, March.
    6. Aurélie Cardona & Cristiana Carusi & Michael Mayerfeld Bell, 2021. "Engaged Intermediaries to Bridge the Gap between Scientists, Educational Practitioners and Farmers to Develop Sustainable Agri-Food Innovation Systems: A US Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-13, October.
    7. Andrea Arzeni & Francesca Giarè & Mara Lai & Maria Valentina Lasorella & Rossella Ugati & Anna Vagnozzi, 2023. "Interactive Approach for Innovation: The Experience of the Italian EIP AGRI Operational Groups," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-24, September.
    8. Mónica Ramos-Mejía & Alejandro Balanzo, 2018. "What It Takes to Lead Sustainability Transitions from the Bottom-Up: Strategic Interactions of Grassroots Ecopreneurs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, July.
    9. Matt, M. & Colinet, L. & Gaunand, A. & Joly, P.B., 2015. "A typology of impact pathways generated by a public agricultural research organization," Working Papers 2015-03, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    10. Labarthe, Pierre & Laurent, Catherine, 2013. "Privatization of agricultural extension services in the EU: Towards a lack of adequate knowledge for small-scale farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 240-252.
    11. Leonidou, Erasmia & Christofi, Michael & Vrontis, Demetris & Thrassou, Alkis, 2020. "An integrative framework of stakeholder engagement for innovation management and entrepreneurship development," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 245-258.
    12. Labarthe, Pierre & Coléno, François & Enjalbert, Jérôme & Fugeray-Scarbel, Aline & Hannachi, Mourad & Lemarié, Stéphane, 2021. "Exploration, exploitation and environmental innovation in agriculture. The case of variety mixture in France and Denmark," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    13. Aidan R. Vining, 2016. "What Is Public Agency Strategic Analysis (PASA) and How Does It Differ from Public Policy Analysis and Firm Strategy Analysis?," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-31, December.
    14. Nobuya Fukugawa & Masahito Ambashi Author-Person : pam152 & Yuanita Suhud, 2018. "Division of Labour Amongst Innovation Intermediaries in Agricultural Innovation Systems: The Case of Indonesia," Working Papers DP-2018-06, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
    15. Lisa Blix Germundsson & Sören Augustinsson & Alina Lidén, 2020. "Collaboration in the Making—Towards a Practice-Based Approach to University Innovation Intermediary Organisations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-14, June.
    16. Laurens Klerkx & Andy Hall & Cees Leeuwis, 2009. "Strengthening agricultural innovation capacity: are innovation brokers the answer?," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(5/6), pages 409-438.
    17. Lambrecht, Evelien & Kühne, Bianka & Gellynck, Xavier, 2014. "Innovation through Networking: The Case of the Agricultural Sector," 2014 International European Forum, February 17-21, 2014, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 199370, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    18. Samuel Howard Quartey & Olamide Oguntoye, 2020. "Promoting corporate sustainability in small and medium‐sized enterprises: Key determinants of intermediary performance in Africa," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1160-1172, March.
    19. Alex Koutsouris, 2012. "Exploring the emerging facilitation and brokerage roles for agricultural extension education," Working Papers 2012-4, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    20. Villalba Morales, María Luisa & Ruiz Castañeda, Walter & Robledo Velásquez, Jorge, 2023. "Configuration of inclusive innovation systems: Function, agents and capabilities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).

    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:sae:millen:v:1:y:2010:i:2:p:197-214. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.