Agricultural Decision-Making: Anthropological Contributions to Rural Development

Conlin, Sean; Barlett, Peggy F.

doi:10.2307/2802055

Cited by 24 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This resulted in divergent trial outcomes and evaluations of the effectiveness of the research trials by farmers. Ashby's work demonstrates that farmer decision-making is far more complex than a 'rational-choice' model, instead drawing upon values, social relations, and complex orientations toward risk (Barlett 2013;Boholm et al 2013;Ortiz [2004] 2020). Further, it provides insight into the 'efficacy-effectiveness gap' (referring to the variability in outcomes found in the context of a controlled trial versus real-world practice) (Eichler et al 2011), which has been repeated many times in the history of both agricultural outreach and public health.…”

Section: The Black Box Of On-farm Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embracing Disconcertment

Thompson

2023

Anthropology in Action

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The digitisation of agriculture is underway—with advocates highlighting its potential to improve resource efficiency and reduce environmental impacts of agriculture, and critics suggesting that emerging technology will exacerbate inequalities in the food system. Drawing on five years of collaboration within an interdisciplinary sustainable agriculture project, I critically consider the limitations of on-farm research as a strategy for rendering ‘real-world’ farm practice into data for digital tools to guide farmer decision-making. In engagements with data science, anthropologists must use our seat at the table to practice what Helen Verran (2001) called ‘generative critique’ in support of responsible research and innovation. Our training in engaged yet critical participant observation, and our experience building long-term relationships within communities, makes anthropologists particularly well-suited for this role.

show abstract

Section: The Black Box Of On-farm Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embracing Disconcertment

Thompson

2023

Anthropology in Action

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Concerning the decision-making process Adesina and Baidu-Forson (1995), Adesina and Zinnah (1993), Barlett (2016), Edwards-Jones (2006), and Prokopy et al (2008) among other scholars identified that farmers' decision-making is determined by a range of aspects such as socioeconomic characteristics, the farmers' context and resources available. Furthermore, Deressa et al (2009) and Di Falco et al (2011) identified access to credit, markets, information on climate change, and extension services as key factors influencing the decision to adapt.…”

Section: Social Capital Risk Preferences and Technical Efficiency Whe...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptation to climate change of vineyard farms in central Chile: risk preferences, social capital, and technical efficiency

Irias¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The potential effects of climate change on global agriculture have been widely studied.However, it is necessary to keep studying the responses that systems and farmers can have to climate change effects. One of these responses is adaptation. In this paper, we have used anticipatory and reactive adaptation because we wanted to know if farmers prefer options to avoid or minimize potential problems or if they prefer to face the straight negative effect of climate change. In this regard, it was necessary to identify the main drivers of farmers' decisions to adapt to climate change. In this context, risk preferences and social capital are essential to the decision-making process. The general objective of this research was to understand how small farmers' risk preferences, along with social capital forms such as trust, norms, and networking, affect the decision to implement anticipatory or reactive adaptation options to climate change. This will provide recommendations to develop policies focusing on adaptation strategies and improving farmers' welfare. This study took place in the two most important regions for the cultivation of vineyards in Chile (O´Higgins and Maule); data were collected through a field experiment and an exit survey from September to December 2016.We conducted a field experiment to elicit the risk preferences of 175 small vineyard farmers; we used the structural and midpoint methods to estimate the Cumulative Prospect Theory (CPT) parameters and social capital variables. Finally, we identify four anticipatory and four reactive adaptation options. The risk preferences parameters indicate that vineyard farmers are risk averse and twice and a half more sensitive to losses than gains and also overestimate small probabilities. The main drivers for adaptation are loss aversion, probability weighting, trust, the social norm of conservation, network, frequency of extension services, and shocks.

show abstract

Transaction Cost Economics and Contractual Choice: Theory and Evidence* *The authors gratefully acknowledge the useful comments of Lee Alston, David Feeny, Bruce Herrick, Timur Kuran, Mustapha Nabli, Keijiro Otsuka, Jean-Philippe Platteau, Murray Wolfson and numerous participants of the University of Warwick's Seminar in Economic Development held in July 1986 on earlier versions of this paper.

Datta¹,

Nugent²

1989

Contributions to Economic Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural Decision-Making: Anthropological Contributions to Rural Development

Cited by 24 publications

References 0 publications

Embracing Disconcertment

Embracing Disconcertment

Adaptation to climate change of vineyard farms in central Chile: risk preferences, social capital, and technical efficiency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About