Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Articles
  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, Jock, 1979, “Perspective on Models of Uncertain Decisions.” InRisk, Uncertainty, and Agricultural Development, J. Roumasset, J. Boussard, and I. Singh, eds. New York: Agricultural Development Council, pp. 39–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R., J. L. Dillon, and J. B. Hardaker, 1977,Agricultural Decision Analysis. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State Univ. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, Kenneth J., 1951, “The Nature of Preference and Choice.”Social Choice and Individual Values. New York: Wiley & Sons, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barlett, Peggy, 1977, “The Structure of Decision Making in Paso.”American Ethnologist 4(2): 285–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benito, Carlos A., 1976, “Peasants' Response to Modernization Projects inMinifundia Economies.”American Journal of Agricultural Economics 58(2): 143–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlin, Brent, and Paul Kay, 1969,Basic Color Terms. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brokensha, David, 1989, “Local Management Systems and Sustainability.” InFood and Farm: Current Debates and Policies, C. Gladwin and K. Thurman, eds. Lantham, Md: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brokensha, David, Michael Warren, and Oswald Werner, 1980,Indigenous Knowledge Systems. Lantham, Md: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush, Stephen, 1989, “The Genetic Question in Agricultural Sustainability.” InFood and Farm: Current Debates and Policies, C. Gladwin and K. Truman, eds. Lantham, Md: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • CIMMYT, (Centro de Investigacion de Maiz y Trigo) 1971,The Puebla Project 1967–69. Mexico, D.F., Mexico: Cimmyt.

    Google Scholar 

  • CIMMYT Economics Staff, 1984, “The Farming Systems Perspective and Farmer Participation in the Development of Appropriate Technology.” InAgricultural Development in the Third World, C. Eicher and J. Staatz, eds. Baltimore: John Hopkins Univ. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • D'Andrade, Roy G., 1981, “The Cultural Part of Cognition.”Cognitive Science 5: 179–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1987, “A Folk Model of the Mind.” InCultural Models in Language and Thought, D. Holland and N. Quinn, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 112–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, Ruth, 1982, “Women in Agriculture: Counting the Labor Force in Developing Countries.”Population and Development Review 8(3): 539–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frake, Charles, 1964, “How to Ask for a Drink in Subanun.”American Anthropologist 66(2): 127–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, Howard, 1985,The Mind's New Science. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gladwin, Christina H., 1975, “A Model of the Supply of Smoked Fish from Cape Coast to Kumasi.” InFormal Methods in Economic Anthropology, S. Plattner ed. Wash., D.C.: A Special Publication of the American Anthropological Association, No. 4, 77–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1976, “A View of the Plan Puebla: An Application of Hierarchical Decision Models.”American Journal of Agricultural Economics 58(5): 881–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1977, A Model of Farmers' Decisions to Adopt the Recommendations of Plan Puebla. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University.

  • __, 1979a, “Cognitive Strategies and Adoption Decisions: A Case Study of Nonadoption of an Agronomic Recommendation.”Economic Development and Cultural Change 28(1): 155–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1979b, “Production Functions and Decision Models: Complementary models,”American Ethnologist 6(4): 653–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1980, “A Theory of Real-Life Choice: Applications to Agricultural Decisions.” InAgricultural Decision Making: Anthropological Contributions to Rural Development, P. Bartlett, ed. New York: Academic Press, pp. 45–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1983, “Contributions of Decision-Tree Metholodology to a Farming Systems Program.”Human Organization 42(2): 146–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1989,Ethnographic Decision Tree Modeling. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gladwin, Christina, and Robert Zabawa, 1984, “Microdynamics of Contradiction Decisions: A Cognitive Approach to Structural Change.”American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66(5): 829–835.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1986, “After Structural Change: Are Part-Time or Full-Time Farmers Better Off? InAgricultural Change: Consequences for Southern Farms and Rural Communities, Joseph Molnar, ed. Boulder (CO): Westview Press, pp. 39–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1987, “Transformations of Full-Time Farms in the U.S.: Can They Survive?” InHousehold Economies and Their Transformations, M. Maclachlan, ed. Philadelphia (PA): University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gladwin, Hugh, 1971, Decision Making in the Cape Coast (Fante) Fishing and Fish Marketing System. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University.

  • __, 1974, “A Study of the Relationship Between Verbalization and Deeper Cognitive Skills in Learning a Complex Task.” Final Report, Project No. 2-0650, Grant No. OEC O-72-1879, U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare.

  • Gladwin, Hugh, and Michael Murtaugh 1984, “Test of a Hierarchical Model of Auto Choice on Data from the National Transportation Survey.”Human Organization 43(3):217–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, Marvin, 1974, “Why a Perfect Knowledge of All the Rules One Must Know to Act Like a Native Cannot Lead to Knowledge of How the Natives Act.”Journal of Anthropological Research 30(4): 242–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1979,Cultural Materialism: The Struggle for a Science of Culture. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky, 1972, “Subjective Probability: A Judgement of Representativeness.”Cognitive Psychology 3: 430–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1982, “The Psychology of Preferences.”Scientific American 246: 160–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, Kevin, 1966, “A New Approach to Consumer Theory.”Journal of Political Economy 74: 132–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinowski, Bronislaw, 1922,Argonauts of the Western Pacific. London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malton, Peter, Ronald Cantrell, David King, and Michel Benoit-Cattin, 1984,Coming Full Circle: Farmers' Participation in the Development of Technology. Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, George, 1956, “The Magic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information.”Psychological Review 63: 81–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, George, Eugene Galanter, and Karl Pribram, 1960,Plans and the Structure of Behavior. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.

  • Mukhopadhyay, Carol, 1984, “Testing a Decision Process Model of the Sexual Division of Labor in the Family.”Human Organization 43(3): 227–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murtaugh, Michael, and Hugh Gladwin, 1980, “A Hierarchical Decision-Process Model for Forecasting Automobile Type Choice,”Transportation Research 14A: 337–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, Alan, and Herbert Simon, 1972,Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Officer, R. R., and A. N. Halter, 1968, “Utility Analysis in a Practical Setting.”American Journal of Agricultural Economics 50: 257–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pike, Kenneth, 1954,Language in Relation to a Unified Theory of the Structure of Human Behavior. The Hauge: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, Naomi, 1971, “Simplifying Procedures in Natural Decision-Making.” Paper presented at the Mathemathical Social Science Board Seminar in Natural Decision Making Behavior, Palo Alto, California, Nov. 22–25.

  • __, 1978, “Do Mfantse Fish Sellers Estimate Problabilities in Their Heads?”American Ethnologist 5(2): 206–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1990,A Model of American Marriage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa, Howard, 1968,Decision Analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romney, Kim, and Roy G. D'Andrade, 1964, “Cognitive Aspects of English Kin Terms.”American Anthropologist 66: 146–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, Roger, and Robert Abelson, 1977,Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. New York: Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoemaker, Paul, 1982, “The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence, and Limitations.”Journal of Economic Literature 20: 529–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoepfle, Mark, Michael Burton, and Frank Morgan, 1984, “Navajos and Energy Development: Economic Decision Making Under Political Uncertainty.”Human Organization 43(3): 265–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spradley, James, 1979,The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, Amos, 1967, “Additivity, Utility, and Subjective Probability.” InDecision Making, W. Edwards and A. Tversky, eds. Penguin Books, pp. 208–239.

  • __, 1969, “The Intransitivity of Preferences.”,Psychological Review 76: 31–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1972, “Elimination by Aspects: A Theory of Choice.”Psychological Review 28: 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman, 1981, “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.”Science 211: 453–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, James C., 1980, “A Model of Illness Treatment Decisions in a Tarascan Town.”American Ethnologist 7(1): 106–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • __, 1981,Medical Choice in a Mexican Village. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner, Oswald, and G. Mark Schoepfle, 1987,Systematic Fieldwork, Vol 1 and 2. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zabawa, Robert, 1984, The Transformation of Farming in Gadsden County, North Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, Northwestern University.

Download references

Authors
  1. Christina H. Gladwin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Christina H. Gladwin is Associate Professor in the Food and Resource Economics Department at the University of Florida, Gainesville. Her research interests include the cognitive relationship between norms, plans, and decision processes and large-scale shifts in norms and choice. The research for this paper was initiated while she was a Rockefeller post-doc assigned to the International Fertilizer Development Center.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gladwin, C.H. Indigenous knowledge systems, the cognitive revolution, and agricultural decision making. Agric Hum Values 6, 32–41 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02217667

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02217667

Keywords

Search

Navigation