How farmers matter in shaping agricultural technologies: social and structural characteristics of wheat growers and wheat varieties

Abstract

Science and technology studies (STS) research challenges the concept of technological determinism by investigating how the end users of a technology influence that technology's trajectory. STS critiques of determinism are needed in studies of agricultural technology. However, we contend that focusing on the agency of end users may mask the role of political-economic factors which influence technology developments and applications. This paper seeks to mesh STS insights with political-economic perspectives by accounting for relationships between availability of diverse technologies, variations in politicaleconomic structures, and farmer interests and characteristics. We present the results of an analysis on the recent development of three wheat varieties: (a) a wheat variety that was modified genetically to tolerate the herbicide glyphosate, (b) wheat varieties with characteristics selected to serve specific markets, (c) and emerging research and development of perennial wheat varieties. Using data obtained through a survey of wheat growers in Washington State, we analyzed whether farmer interest in these three clusters of wheat varieties was associated with distinct individual characteristics and attitudes and whether those characteristics and attitudes are consistent with political economic structures. Although our analysis did not allow us to assess the degree of direct influence that farmers have on the technological development trajectory for these types of wheat, we were able to document variation in technological alternatives and farmer characteristics related to different political-economic trends.

The Theory and Practice of Genetically Engineered Crops and Agricultural Sustainability

“…In a study of wheat growers in Washington State, Glenna et al found that farmer interests in different wheat varieties can be explained by farmers' social characteristics [5]. Larger, wealthier farmers engaged in conventional agricultural production were more likely to express interest in Roundup Ready wheat, while smaller, less conventional farmers were more interested in wheat varieties with traits suitable for special markets and in perennial wheat varieties that would not need to be planted every year.…”

“…Participatory plant breeding and surveys of farmers to determine their perspectives on wheat breeding programs are just two approaches in which scientists can incorporate farmers into the process of setting the research agenda and in shaping dissemination [5,40]. In at least one case, a participatory plant breeding project came close to achieving Kleinman's participatory ideal of involving laypeople in the process of generating science and technology [90].…”

“…From our perspective, these vociferous proponents and critics of GE agricultural technology share a strong technological deterministic orientation. Technological determinism refers to the idea that a technology's influence on society is unidirectional and guided by qualities inherent to the technology, rather than being shaped by political, economic, and social contexts [5]. Such an orientation fails to appreciate how social structures and processes of technological development are embedded within each other, and subsequently do not represent accurate evaluations of a technology's sustainability potential.…”

Farmers’ Interest in Agricultural Technology and Organic Farming: Implications for AD Adoption and Sustainable Agriculture in the UK

“…Communication between farmers, policy makers and conservationists is vital for the sustainability of agricultural production (Schoon and Grotenhuis 2000;Ingram 2008;Glenna et al 2011). The main reason for this is to continually update farmers on the new skills needed to meet the demands of sustainable agriculture (Ingram 2008).…”

The Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the United States

“…And even when there is a genuine effort to integrate multiple perspectives, the social and economic dimensions are sometimes minimized. This takes us again to the productivist approach that considers yield increase as an Book Review 545 unmitigated social benefit, overlooking the fact that it does not necessarily ensure improved economic farm viability or decreased hunger, poverty reduction or social equity issues, especially in non-industrialized countries (de Grassi, 2003;Ervin et al, 2010;Glenna et al, 2011;Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 1999).…”