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. 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).
    2. 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.
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Hu, Ruifa & Cai, Yaqing & Chen, Kevin Z. & Huang, Jikun, 2012. "Effects of inclusive public agricultural extension service: Results from a policy reform experiment in western China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 962-974.
    10. Ornella W. Maietta & Cristian Barra & Roberto Zotti, 2017. "Innovation and University-Firm R&D Collaboration in the European Food and Drink Industry," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 749-780, September.
    11. FILIPPI, Marilyne & FREY, Olivier, 2015. "Le conseiller, une pièce maîtresse sur l'échiquier de la coopérative agricole," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 96(3), September.
    12. Katrine Soma & Benson Obwanga & Charles Mbauni Kanyuguto, 2021. "A New Rural-Urban Fish Food System Was Established in Kenya–Learning from Best Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-14, June.
    13. Ingram, Julie & Dwyer, Janet & Gaskell, Peter & Mills, Jane & Wolf, Pieter de, 2018. "Reconceptualising translation in agricultural innovation: A co-translation approach to bring research knowledge and practice closer together," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 38-51.
    14. 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.
    15. Andrei Andreia Gabriela & Dincă Violeta-Mihaela & Mitan Andreea & Vătămănescu Elena-Mădălina, 2021. "Connecting the Dots: Exploring the Knowledge-based Antecedents of SMEs’ Profitability and Development via International Ventures," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 16(3), pages 167-186, September.
    16. Zofia Gródek-Szostak & Marcin Suder & Rafał Kusa & Anna Szeląg-Sikora & Joanna Duda & Marcin Niemiec, 2020. "Renewable Energy Promotion Instruments Used by Innovation Brokers in a Technology Transfer Network. Case Study of the Enterprise Europe Network," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-13, November.
    17. Skaalsveen, Kamilla & Ingram, Julie & Urquhart, Julie, 2020. "The role of farmers' social networks in the implementation of no-till farming practices," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    18. Klerkx, Laurens & Nettle, Ruth, 2013. "Achievements and challenges of innovation co-production support initiatives in the Australian and Dutch dairy sectors: A comparative study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 74-89.
    19. Tindara Abbate & Raffaella Coppolino & Francesco Schiavone, 2013. "Linking Entities in Knowledge Transfer: The Innovation Intermediaries," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 4(3), pages 233-243, September.
    20. Kuldeep Singh & Madhvendra Misra, 2021. "Developing an agricultural entrepreneur inclination model for sustainable agriculture by integrating expert mining and ISM–MICMAC," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 5122-5150, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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: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.