Agriculture and Human Values

, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 477–489 | Cite as

Evolution of agricultural extension and information dissemination in Peru: An historical perspective focusing on potato-related pest control

  • Oscar OrtizEmail author


Multiplicity and continual change characterize the Peruvian agricultural knowledge and information system (AKIS), reflecting changes in the agricultural sector as a whole. The evolution of these changes can be traced back to the pre-Columbian era when a relatively stable and well-organized system based on indigenous knowledge prevailed. During colonial (1532–1821) and early Republican times (beginning 1821) several changes affecting the agricultural sector contributed to a weakening of indigenous knowledge systems. During the 20th century extension services provided by the government and a variety of private organizations began to play an important role in the dissemination of information, albeit in an erratic way. Since the 1970s the system increased in complexity with the emergence of non-governmental institutions. Today government participation is limited and there is a more important participation by a number of NGOs and private organizations. This diversity of actors using different approaches has generated disarray in the information system owing to the lack of coherent policies to guide the interaction among actors. This paper uses the case of potato pest control-related information to illustrate changes in local knowledge systems. It differentiates pest control based on indigenous knowledge, chemical control, and integrated pest management (IPM) and explains how changes in the system have influenced the use of these three types of information in AKIS. Currently, the coexistence of different types of potato pest control information promoted and used by diverse and usually unconnected sets of organizations and individuals presents a challenge and requires inter-institutional action guided by clear policies to promote sustainable agriculture.


Agricultural extension Agricultural history, Agricultural knowledge and information systems (AKIS) Indigenous knowledge Integrated pest management Pest control Peru Potato 



Agricultural knowledge and information systems


International Potato Center


Farmer field school


Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agraria (National Institute of Agrarian Research)


Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Promoción Agropecuaria (National Agricultural Institute for Research and Promotion)


Integrated pest management


Proyecto Andino de tecnologías campesinas (Andean project of farmer technologies)


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alcázar J., Catalán W., Raman K.V., Cisneros F., Torres H., Ortiz O. (1994). Control integrado del gorgojo de los Andes (Integrated control of the Andean potato weevil). Lima, Peru: International Potato CenterGoogle Scholar
  2. Ameur, C. (1994). Agricultural Extension. A Step beyond the Next Step. World Bank Technical Paper No. 247. Washington DC: The World BankGoogle Scholar
  3. Bebbington A. (1994). Farmers’ federations and food systems: Organisation for enhancing rural livelihoods. In: Scoones I., Thompson J. (eds.) Beyond Farmers First. Rural People’s Knowledge, Agricultural Research and Extension Practice. London, UK: Intermediate Technology Publications, pp. 220–224Google Scholar
  4. Bebbington H., Thiele G., Davies P., Prayer M., Riveros H. (1993). Non-governmental Organizations and the State in Latin America. Rethinking Roles in Sustainable Agricultural Development. New York, New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Burga, M. and N. Manrique (1990). “Rasgos fundamentales de la historia agraria peruana, siglos XVI-XX (Fundamental characteristics of the Peruvian agrarian history).” In A.␣Chirif, N. Manrique, and B. Quijandría (eds.), Proceedings of SEPIA III. Perú: El problema agrario en debate (Peru: The agrarian problem in debate) (pp. 23–61). Lima, Peru: Seminario Permanente de Investigaciones Agrarias and Centro de Estudios Rurales Bartolomé de las Casas (Permanent Seminar of Agrarian Research and Rural Study Center Bartolomé de las Casas)Google Scholar
  6. Caballero J. (1984) Agriculture and the peasantry under industrialization pressures. Lessons from the Peruvian experience. Latin American Research Review 19: 3–42Google Scholar
  7. Caballero J. (1981) Economía agraria de la sierra peruana antes de la reforma agraria de 1969 (Agricultural economy in the Peruvian highlands before the agrarian reform of 1969). Lima, Peru: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos (Institute of Peruvian Studies). IEP EdicionesGoogle Scholar
  8. Carrol T., Humphreys D., Scurrah M. (1991). Grassroots support organizations in Peru. Development in Practice 1: 97–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chambers R. (1997). Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last. London, UK: Intermediate Technology PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  10. Chang-Navarro, L., A. de los Ríos, E. Peralta, and R. Vergara (1995). “Experiencia del proyecto de fomento de la transferencia de tecnología en comunidades campesinas de la Sierra del Perú (Experience of the project of promotion of technology transfer in peasant communities in the Peruvian highlands).” In Seminario regional sobre iniciativas y sistemas privados de transferencia de tecnología para el desarrollo rural (Regional seminar about initiatives of, and private systems for, technology transfer oriented to rural development). October 16–17. Lima, Peru: IICAGoogle Scholar
  11. Chavez, C. (2000). Actividad migratoria y daño del Gorgojo (Premnotrypes spp.) en dos comunidades altiplánicas del Departamento de la Paz (Migratory activity and damage caused by the Andean potato weevil (Premnotrypes spp.) in two communities located in the Altiplano of la Paz Department). BSc dissertation [Ingeniero Agrónomo]. Universidad Técnica de Oruro. Facultad de Ciencias Agrícolas y Pecuarias (Technical University of Oruro. Faculty of Agricultural Sciences), Oruro, BoliviaGoogle Scholar
  12. Chiri, A., H. Fano, F. Cama, and W. Dale (1996). Final Evaluation of the Integrated Pest Management for Andean Communities (MIP-Andes) Project. Internal Report. Lima, Peru: CAREGoogle Scholar
  13. Christiansen J. (1967). El cultivo de la papa en el Perú (The potato crop in Peru). Lima, Peru: Editorial Jurídica S.AGoogle Scholar
  14. CIP (International Potato Center) (1995). Annual Report. Lima, Peru: International Potato CenterGoogle Scholar
  15. Cobo, B. (1653/1990). Inca Religion and Customs. (R. Hamilton, translator, editor.) Austin, Texas: University of Texas PressGoogle Scholar
  16. Cobo, B. (1653/1979). History of the Inca Empire. (R. Hamilton, translator, editor.) Austin, Texas: University of Texas PressGoogle Scholar
  17. Cotlear D. (1989) Desarrollo campesino en los Andes: cambio tecnológico y transformación social en las comunidades de la Sierra del Perú (Peasant development in the Andes: technological change and social transformation in Peruvian highland communities). Lima, Peru: IEP. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos (Institute of Peruvian Studies)Google Scholar
  18. Crissman, C., D. C. Cole, and F. Carpio (1994). “Pesticide use and farm worker health in Ecuadorian potato production.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics (August) 76: 593–597Google Scholar
  19. De la Vega, G. (1966). Royal Commentaries of the Incas and General History of Peru [1609–1617]. (H. Livermore, translator, editor.) Austin, Texas: University of Texas PressGoogle Scholar
  20. Donkin R. A. (1979). Agricultural Terracing in the Aboriginal New World. Tucson, Arizona: University of Arizona PressGoogle Scholar
  21. Engel P. (1997). The Social Organization of Innovation. A Focus on Stakeholder Interaction. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Royal Tropical InstituteGoogle Scholar
  22. Ewell P., Fano H., Raman K. V., Alcázar J., Palacios M., Carhuamaca J. (1990). Farmer Management of Potato Insects in Peru. Lima, Peru: International Potato CenterGoogle Scholar
  23. Fano H., Ortiz O., T. Walker (1996) Peru: Inter-institutional cooperation for IPM. In: Thrupp L. A. (eds.) New Partnerships for Sustainable Agriculture. Washington DC: World Resources Institute, pp. 85–98Google Scholar
  24. Franco, E. (1986). “Cambios tecnológicos en la agricultura (Technological change in agriculture).” In Gómez, B.␣Revesz, E. Grillo, and R. Montoya (eds.), Proceedings of SEPIA I Perú: El problema agrario en debate (Peru: Agrarian problem in debate) (pp. 217–242). Lima, Peru: ITDGGoogle Scholar
  25. Ganoza, V., G. Norton, C. Pomareda, R. Evenson, and E.␣Walters (1990). “Evaluating agricultural research and extension in Peru.” In R. G. Echeverría (ed.), Methods for Diagnosis Research Systems Constraints and Assessing the Impact of Agricultural Research. Vol. II, Assessing the Impact of Agricultural Research (pp. 175–196). The Hague, The Netherlands: ISNARGoogle Scholar
  26. Gligo N. (1990) Agricultural development systems in Latin America: A historical perspective.” In: Altiery M., Hecht S. (eds.) Agroecology and Small Farm Development. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, pp. 73–81Google Scholar
  27. Godland, E. M. (2001). Reducing Poverty in the Andes with Genetically Improved Potato Varieties: The Importance of Knowledge and Risk. PhD dissertation. Agriculture and Resource Economics Department. University of California, Berkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  28. Godtland E., Sadoulet E., de Janvry A., Murgai R., Ortiz O. (2004). The impact of farmer-field-schools on knowledge and productivity: A study of potato farmers in the Peruvian Andes. Economic Development and Cultural Change 53(1): 63–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gomero O. (1991). Características del consumo de agroquímicos en el Perú (Characteristics of the use of agrochemicals in Peru). In: Gomero L. (eds.) Agroquímicos problema nacional. Políticas y alternatives (Agrochemicals, national problem, policies and alternatives). Lima, Peru: Instituto de Desarrollo y Medio Ambiente. Servicio Alemán de Cooperación Social-Técnica. Red de Acción en Agroquímicos y sus Alternativas (Institute for Development and Environment. German Service of Social and Technical Cooperation. Action Network on Alternatives to Agrochemicals), pp. 27–58Google Scholar
  30. Groeneweg, K., A. Versteeg and J. Chavez-Tafur (2004). Más nos han enseñado mucho hemos aprendido. El proyecto GCP/PER/036/NET Manejo integrado de plagas en los principales cultivos alimenticios en el Perú y el impacto logrado en los agricultores (The more you have taught us, the more we have learned. The project GCP/PER/036/NET on integrated pest management for the main food crops in Peru and the impact at farmer level). Lima, Peru: FAO-PeruGoogle Scholar
  31. Guamán Poma de Ayala, A. (1613/1980). Nueva crónica y buen gobierno (New chronicle and good government). Lima, Peru: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos (Institute of Peruvian Studies)Google Scholar
  32. Hastorf C.A. (1993) Agriculture and the Onset of Political Inequality before the Inka. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  33. Haudry de Soucy, R. (1990). “Proyectos de inversión en la Sierra y políticas de desarrollo rural (Investment projects in the highlands and rural development policies).” In A. Chirif, N. Manrique and B. Quijandría (eds.), Proceedings of SEPIA III Perú: El problema agrario en debate (Peru: The agrarian problem in debate) (pp. 253–272). Lima, Peru: Seminario Permanente de Investigaciones Agrarias and Centro de Estudios Rurales Bartolomé de las Casas (Permanent Seminar of Agrarian Research and Rural Study Center Bartolomé de las Casas)Google Scholar
  34. Horton D. (1987). Potatoes: Production, Marketing and Programs for Developing Countries. Boulder, Colorado: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  35. Horton, D. (1976). Haciendas and Cooperatives: A Study of State Organization, Land Reform and New Reform Enterprises in Peru. PhD dissertation. Latin American Studies Program. Cornell University, Ithaca, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Ichuta, A. (1997). Comportamiento del gorgojo de los Andes (Premnotrypes spp.) en el cultivo de papa amarga en Waru Waru en diferentes edades en Puno (Behavior of the Andean potato weevil (Premnotrypes spp.) on bitter Potato varieties in Waru Waru system of different ages in Puno). BSc dissertation [Ingeniero Agrónomo]. Facultad de Ciencias Agrícolas. Universidad Nacional del Altiplano, Puno, Peru (Faculty of Agricultural Sciences. National University of Altiplano)Google Scholar
  37. INCAGRO (Innovación and Competitividad en el Agro) (2002). “Fondo de tecnología agraria (Agrarian technology fund).” Boletín INCAGRO, Innovación y Competitividad para el Agro Peruano (INCAGRO Bulletin, Innovation and competitiveness for the Peruvian agriculture). Year I, No 2. December 2002. Lima, Peru: Ministerio de Agricultura (Ministry of Agriculture)Google Scholar
  38. INIPA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Promoción Agropecuaria) (1986). Lineamientos generales sobre el servicio de extensión agropecuaria 1986–1990 (General guidelines about the agricultural extension service 1986–1990). Lima, Peru: Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Promoción Agropecuaria (National Research Institute for Agriculture and Promotion)Google Scholar
  39. Mata, J. (1992). CTTA, un método para transferir tecnología a los agricultores: una guía para planificación e implementación. Proyecto de Comunicación para la Transferencia de Tecnología en Agricultura (CTTA, a method for technology transfer to farmers: a guideline for planning and implementing. Project of Communication for Technology Transfer in Agriculture). Washington DC: Academy for Educational DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
  40. Moseley M. (1992). The Incas and Their Ancestors: The Archaeology of Peru. London, UK: Thames and Hudson Google Scholar
  41. Nelson R., Orrego J. R., Ortiz O., Mundt M., Fredrix M., Vien N. (2001). Working with resource-poor farmers to manage plant diseases. Plant Disease 85(7): 684–695Google Scholar
  42. Olcese O. (2002). Enfrentando la adversidad, camino a la Gloria: 100 años de historia de la Universidad Nacional Agraria la Molina (Facing adversity, a road to glory: 100 years of history of the National Agrarian University La Molina). Lima, Peru: Universidad Nacional Agraria la Molina (National Agrarian University La Molina)Google Scholar
  43. Ortiz, O. (1997). The Information System for IPM in Subsistence Potato Production in Peru: Experience of Introducing Innovative Information in Cajamarca Province. PhD dissertation. Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development. The University of Reading, Reading, UKGoogle Scholar
  44. Ortiz O., Garret K.A., Heath J.J., Orrego R., Nelson R. (2004). Management of potato late blight in the Peruvian Highlands: Evaluating the benefits of farmer field schools and farmer participatory research. Plant Disease 88(5): 565–571Google Scholar
  45. Paz, J. and J. Puiggros (1985). Potencial y posibilidades de la investigación y extensión agropecuaria privada (Potential and possibilities of private agricultural research and extension). Manuscript. Biblioteca Agrícola Nacional (National Agrarian Library) Lima, PeruGoogle Scholar
  46. PRATEC (Proyecto Andino de Tecnologías Campesinas) (1988). Saber Campesino Andino. I Taller regional sur andino de tecnologías campesinas (Indigenous Andean knowledge. First workshop in the Southern highlands about farmer technologies). Lima, Peru: Proyecto Andino de Tecnologías Campesinas (Andean Project of Farmer Technologies)Google Scholar
  47. Quiroz C. (1999) Local knowledge systems in Latin America. Current trends and contributions towards sustainable development. In: Pichon F., Uquillas J., Frechione J. (eds.) Traditional and Modern Natural Resource Management in Latin America. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 212–232Google Scholar
  48. Ramírez, J. (1991). Análisis de la aplicación del método Capacitación y Visita en la Agencia de Extensión de Huancané (Analysis of the use of the training and visit system in the extension agency of Huancane). MSc dissertation. Escuela de Post Grado. Especialidad de Producción y Extensión Agrícola (Graduate School. Specialty of Crop Production and Agricultural Extension). Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina (National Agrarian University La Molina). Lima, PeruGoogle Scholar
  49. Remy, M. (1990). “Historia agraria Cusqueña. Balance y perspectivas (Cusco agrarian history. Balance and perspectives).” In A. Chirif, N. Manrique, and B. Quijandría (eds.), Proceedings of SEPIA III Peru: El problema agraria en debate (SEPIA III Peru: The agrarian problem in debate) (pp.␣63–85). Centro de Estudios Rurales Andinos Bartolomé de las Casas, Seminario Permanente de Investigación Agraria (Andean Study Center Bartolomé de las Casas, Permanent Seminar of Agrarian Research). SEPIA, Lima, PeruGoogle Scholar
  50. Rhoades B., Booth R. (1982) Farmer-back-to-farmer: A model for generating acceptable agricultural technology. Agricultural Administration 11:127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Röling N. (1990) The Agricultural research-technology transfer interfaces. A knowledge systems perspective. In: Kaimowits D. (eds.) Making the Link. Agricultural Research and Technology Transfer in Developing Countries. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, pp. 1–41Google Scholar
  52. Rowe J. H. (1963) Inca culture at the time of the Spanish conquest. In: Steward J. H. (eds.) Handbook of South American Indians. New York, New York: Cooper Square Publishers, pp. 183–330Google Scholar
  53. Salaman R. (1985). The History and Social Influence of the Potato. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  54. Salas M. A. (1991). Extension and indigenous knowledge systems in conflict: Strengthening the Andean Knowledge Systems in Peru. Journal of Extension Systems 7: 18–29Google Scholar
  55. SCTI (Secretaría de Cooperación Técnica Internacional) (1996). “Cooperación internacional y ONGs (International cooperation and NGOs).” El Comercio (Lima), September 23, 1996: 6Google Scholar
  56. Seifert R. (1990) Cajamarca: vía campesina y cuenca lechera (Cajamarca: the peasant way and dairy cattle production). Lima, Peru: CONCYTEC and Centro de Apoyo a la Producción Lechera en Cajamarca (Support Center for Dairy Cattle in Cajamarca)Google Scholar
  57. Smith R., Apple J. L., Bottrell D. G. (1976) The origins of integrated pest management concepts for agricultural crops. In: Apple J. L., Smith R. I. (eds.) Integrated Pest Management. New York, New York: Plenum Press, pp. 1–16Google Scholar
  58. Stern S. J. (1982). Los pueblos indígenas del Perú y el desafío de la conquista española: Huamanga hasta 1640 (The indigenous people of Peru and the challenge of Spanish conquest: Huamanga until 1640). Madrid, Spain: Alianza EditorialGoogle Scholar
  59. Tapia M. (1996) Ecodesarrollo en los Andes Altos (Eco-development the high Andes). Lima, Peru: Fundación Friedrich EbertGoogle Scholar
  60. Taylor L. (1994) Estructuras agrarias y cambios sociales en Cajamarca, siglos XIX-XX (Agrarian structures and social change in Cajamarca, XIX-XX centuries). Cajamarca, Peru and Liverpool, UK: Institute of Latin American Studies and University of LiverpoolGoogle Scholar
  61. Thiele G., van de Fliert E., Campilan D. (2001) What happened to participatory research at the International Potato Center? Agriculture and Human Values 18(4): 429–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Thorp R., Bertram G. (1988) Peru: 1890–1977. Crecimiento y políticas en una economía abierta (Peru: 1890–1977. Growth and policies in an open economy). Lima, Peru: Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Universidad del Pacífico (El Pacifico University), Mosca Azul EditoresGoogle Scholar
  63. Thurston D. (1992). Sustainable Practices for Plant Disease Management in Traditional Farming Systems. Boulder, Colorado: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
  64. Torres J. L. (1896). Cartilla de Agricultura del Perú (Agricultural Guideline of Peru). Lima, Peru: Imprenta El ComercioGoogle Scholar
  65. Vásquez A. (1994) Reforma del estado y política agraria. Logros y perspectives (State reform and agrarian policies. Achievements and perspectives). Lima, Peru: Ministerio de Agricultura (Ministry of Agriculture)Google Scholar
  66. Zimmerer K. (1996). Changing Fortunes: Biodiversity and Peasant Livelihood in the Peruvian Andes. Berkley, California: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  67. Zimmerer K. (1991) Agricultura de barbecho sectorizado en las Alturas de Paucartambo: luchas sobre la ecología del espacio productivo durante los siglos XVI y XX (Sectoral fallowing system in the high Andes of Paucartambo: encounters of ecology and productive space between XVI and XX Centuries). Allpanchis 23: 189–226Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Potato CenterLimaPeru

Personalised recommendations