Human Ecology

, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 143–159 | Cite as

Mapping Knowledge: GIS as a Tool for Spatial Modeling of Patterns of Warangal Cotton Seed Popularity and Farmer Decision-Making

  • Andrew Flachs
  • Glenn Davis Stone
  • Christopher Shaffer


In the Warangal district of Telangana, India, poor farmer knowledge, rapid seed turnover, and farmer conformist bias have resulted in faddish spikes in GM cotton seed popularity. We analyze space as a variable in 2715 seed choices by 136 farmers in two villages between 2004 and 2014, allowing us to model a decade of changes in farmers’ social learning across the village landscape. GIS analysis in combination with ethnographic research reveals shifting loci of seed certainty, in which different farmers were deemed worthy of emulation in different years. Over the study period, Warangal farmers were far more likely to emulate field neighbors’ cotton choices than they were to replant seeds, regardless of their crop yields. Rapid seed turnover and seed choice conformity was strongest among the comparatively poorer Scheduled Tribe farmers who live on the outskirts of the town proper. When the same farmers plant rice, their choices are more consistent through time and across space, suggesting that farmers learn about these two crops in very different ways.


Genetically modified crops GIS South India Social learning Farmer decision-making 



We would like to thank Mollie Webb, Cindy Traub, and Jennifer Moore for the useful comments they have provided on this paper; Ram Mohan and Vandita Rao for their logistical help in Telangana; and N. Ranjith Kumar, Arun Vainala Kumar, and Golusula Rani for their assistance in collecting these data. We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers who provided comments that that improved this manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

This project received IRB approval from Washington University in St. Louis, all interlocutors gave informed consent to participate in the study, and this project was conducted in coordination with the Centre for Economic and Social Studies in Hyderabad, Telangana and the Rural Development Foundation.


This research was supported by the Jacob K. Javits Fellowship, the National Geographic Young Explorer’s Grant 9304–13, the John Templeton Foundation (Glenn Davis Stone PI), and Washington University in St. Louis.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Aswani S., and Lauer M. (2006). Incorporating Fishermen’s local knowledge and behavior into geographical information systems (giS) for designing marine protected areas in Oceania. Human Organization 65(1): 81–102. doi: 10.17730/humo.65.1.4y2q0vhe4l30n0uj.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bikhchandani S., Hirshleifer D., and Welch I. (1992). A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of Political Economy 100(5): 992–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bikhchandani S., Hirshleifer D., and Welch I. (1998). Learning from the behavior of others: conformity, fads, and informational cascades. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 12(3): 151–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyd R., and Richerson P. J. (1988). Culture and the evolutionary process, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  5. Boyd R., Richerson P., and Henrich J. (2011). The cultural niche: why social learning is essential for human adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108(Supplement 2): 10918–10925. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1100290108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Conley T. G., and Udry C. R. (2010). Learning about a new technology: pineapple in Ghana. The American Economic Review 100(1): 35–69. doi: 10.2307/27804921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cotton Corporation of India Ltd (2014). 44th Annual Report 2013–2014. In Annual Report 44, Cotton Corporation of India Ltd., Mumbai.Google Scholar
  8. Flachs A. (2016a). Cultivating Knowledge: The Production and Adaptation of Knowledge on Organic and GM Cotton Farms in Telangana, India. In Doctoral Dissertation, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis.Google Scholar
  9. Flachs A. (2016b). Redefining success: the political ecology of genetically modified and organic cotton as solutions to agrarian crisis. Journal of Political Economy 23(1): 49–70.Google Scholar
  10. Griliches Z. (1957). Hybrid corn: an exploration in the economics of technological change. Econometrica 25(4): 501–522. doi: 10.2307/1905380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Griliches Z. (1980). Hybrid corn revisited: a reply. Econometrica 48(6): 1463–1465. doi: 10.2307/1912818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heidegger, M. (2012). Bremen and Freiburg Lectures: Insight Into That Which Is and Basic Principles of Thinking. Translated by Andrew J. Mitchell. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  13. Henrich J. (2001). Cultural transmission and the diffusion of innovations: adoption dynamics indicate that biased cultural transmission is the predominate force in behavioral change. American Anthropologist 103(4): 992–1013. doi: 10.1525/aa.2001.103.4.992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Herring, R. J., and Chandrasekhara Rao, N. (2012). On the ‘failure of bt cotton’: Analysing a decade of experience. Economic and Political Weekly 47(18): 45–53.Google Scholar
  15. Ingold T. (2011). The perception of the environment: essays on livelihood, Dwelling & Skill, 2nd edn., Taylor & Francis Group, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Iyengar S. S., Huberman G., and Jang W. (2004). How much choice is too much? Contributions to 401(k) retirement plans. In Mitchell O. S., and Utkus S. (eds.), Pension design and Stricutre: new lessons from behavior finance, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kockelman, P. (2015). Four Theories of Things: Aristotle, Marx, Heidegger, and Peirce. Signs and Society 3(1): 153–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Menard, S. (1995). Applied Logistic Regression Analysis, vol. 106. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  19. Mines D. P. (2005). Fierce gods: inequality, ritual, and the politics of dignity in a South Indian Village, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  20. Rao A. S. (2012). Acute Shortage of Bt Cotton Seeds in Andhra Pradesh. India Today. (June 24)
  21. Richerson, Peter J., and Robert Boyd. (2008). Not By Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  22. Rogers E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5th edn., Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Sanders C., and McKay K. (2014). Where have all the young men gone?: social fragmentation during rapid neoliberal development in Nepal’s Himalayas. Human Organization 73(1): 25–37. doi: 10.17730/humo.73.1.6w0k19208067802p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stone G. D. (2007). Agricultural deskilling and the spread of genetically modified cotton in Warangal. Current Anthropology 48(1): 67–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stone G. D. (2016). Towards a general theory of agricultural knowledge production: environmental, social, and didactic learning. Culture, Agriculture, Food and Environment 38(1): 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stone G. D., Flachs A., and Diepenbrock C. (2014). Rhythms of the herd: long term dynamics in seed choice by Indian farmers. Technology in Society 36(1): 26–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tepic M., Trienekens J., Hoste R., and Omta S. W. F. (2012). The influence of networking and absorptive capacity on the innovativeness of farmers in the Dutch pork sector. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 15(3): 1–34.Google Scholar
  28. The New Indian Express. (2012). “A Mayhem Called Mahyco Seed Shortage.” The New Indian Express. June 25.
  29. Tripp R. (2006). Self-sufficient agriculture: labour and knowledge in small-scale farming, Routledge, Sterling.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyWashington University in Saint LouisSt. LouisUSA
  2. 2.Department of AnthropologyGrand Valley State UniversityAllendaleUSA

Personalised recommendations