IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v6y1989i3p32-41.html

Indigenous knowledge systems, the cognitive revolution, and agricultural decision making

Author

Listed:
  • Christina Gladwin

Abstract

Increasingly, it is accepted wisdom for agricultural scientists to get feedback from indigenous peoples—peasants—about new improved seeds and biotechnologies before their official release from the experiment station. What is not yet accepted wisdom is the importance of cognitive science to research on farmer decision making, especially of the type “Why don't they adopt.” In this paper, the impact of the cognitive revolution on models of farmer decision making is described, and decision making models before and after the cognitive revolution are contrasted. An example of a decision model after the cognitive revolution is given by the Malawi farmer's decision whether to use chemical fertilizers or organic fertilizers or both. Results of testing the model show that in Malawi, smallholders' lack of capital and credit are more important factors constraining use of chemical fertilizers than are indigenous beliefs in organic fertilizers or fears of a future dependency on chemicals. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Suggested Citation

  • Christina Gladwin, 1989. "Indigenous knowledge systems, the cognitive revolution, and agricultural decision making," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 6(3), pages 32-41, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:6:y:1989:i:3:p:32-41
    DOI: 10.1007/BF02217667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF02217667
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF02217667?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:ags:agsaem:288652 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. R. R. Officer & A. N. Halter, 1968. "Utility Analysis in a Practical Setting," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 50(2), pages 257-277.
    3. Schoemaker, Paul J H, 1982. "The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 529-563, June.
    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. Andrew Raedeke & J. Rikoon, 1997. "Temporal and spatial dimensions of knowledge: Implications for sustainable agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 14(2), pages 145-158, June.
    2. Micha, E. & Tsakiridis, A. & Ragkos, A., 2018. "Assessing the importance of soil testing in fertilizer use intensity: an econometric analysis of phosphorus fertilizer allocation in dairy farm systems," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277103, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Newsome, Lucie & Sheridan, Alison, 2018. "Taking Stock: Identifying the Growing Agricultural Service Sector in Australia," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 26.

    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. Gomez-Limon, Jose A. & Arriaza, Manuel & Riesgo, Laura, 2003. "An MCDM analysis of agricultural risk aversion," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 569-585, December.
    2. Gomez-Limon, Jose Antonio & Riesgo, Laura & Arriaza Balmón, Manuel, 2002. "Agricultural Risk Aversion Revisited: A Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24827, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Anderson, Jock R. & Dillon, John L. & Hardaker, J. Brian, 1985. "Farmers and Risk," 1985 Conference, August 26-September 4, 1985, Malaga, Spain 183026, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Malcolm, Bill, 1990. "Fifty Years of Farm Management in Australia: Survey and Review," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(01), pages 1-32, April.
    5. Love, Ross O. & Robison, Lindon J., 1984. "An Empirical Analysis Of The Intertemporal Stability Of Risk Preference," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 16(01), pages 1-7, July.
    6. repec:isu:genstf:198801010800009839 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Kalogeras, Nikos & Pennings, Joost M.E. & Garcia, Philip, 2006. "What Drives Strategic Behavior? A Framework to Explain and Predict SMEs' Transition to Sustainable Production Systems," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21354, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. van Riel, A.C.R. & Lievens, A., 2003. "New service development in high tech sectors: a decision making perspective," Research Memorandum 013, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    9. Harin, Alexander, 2006. "Scientific Revolution? A Farewell to EconWPA. MPRA is welcome," MPRA Paper 71, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Gatti, Nicolas & Cecil, Michael & Baylis, Kathy & Estes, Lyndon & Blekking, Jordan & Heckelei, Thomas & Vergopolan, Noemi & Evans, Tom, 2023. "Is closing the agricultural yield gap a “risky” endeavor?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    11. Paul Downward, "undated". "Risk, Uncertainty and Inference in Post Keynesian Economics:A Realist Commentary," Working Papers 98-8, Staffordshire University, Business School.
    12. King, Robert P. & Robison, Lindon J., "undated". "Implementing Stochastic Dominance With Respect To A Function," Risk Analysis in Agriculture: Research and Educational Developments, January 16-18, 1980, Tucson, Arizona 271563, Regional Research Projects > W-149: An Economic Evaluation of Managing Market Risks in Agriculture.
    13. Wlömert, Nils & Papies, Dominik, 2016. "On-demand streaming services and music industry revenues — Insights from Spotify's market entry," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 314-327.
    14. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2006. "Environmental Morale and Motivation," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-17, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    15. Hoon S. Choi & Darrell Carpenter & Myung S. Ko, 2022. "Risk Taking Behaviors Using Public Wi-Fi™," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 965-982, June.
    16. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    17. Michaël Lainé, 2014. "Vers une alternative au paradigme de la rationalité ? Victoires et déboires du programme spinoziste en économie," Post-Print hal-01335618, HAL.
    18. Christopher Prendergast, 1993. "Rationality, Optimality, and Choice," Rationality and Society, , vol. 5(1), pages 47-57, January.
    19. Rasmussen, Svend, 2003. "Criteria for optimal production under uncertainty. The state-contingent approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-30.
    20. Finkelshtain, Israel & Feinerman, Eli, 1997. "Framing the Allais paradox as a daily farm decision problem: tests and explanations," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 155-167, January.
    21. Segal, Uzi, 1987. "The Ellsberg Paradox and Risk Aversion: An Anticipated Utility Approach," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 28(1), pages 175-202, February.

    More about this item

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:6:y:1989:i:3:p:32-41. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.