• Please log in or register to access this feature.
You have free access to this content

Decontextualized Knowledge, Situated Politics: The New Scientific–Local Politics of Rice Genetic Resources in Thailand

  1. Witchuda Srang-iam

Article first published online: 14 JAN 2013

DOI: 10.1111/dech.12002

Issue

Development and Change

Development and Change

Volume 44, Issue 1, pages 1–27, January 2013

Additional Information

How to Cite

Srang-iam, W. (2013), Decontextualized Knowledge, Situated Politics: The New Scientific–Local Politics of Rice Genetic Resources in Thailand. Development and Change, 44: 1–27. doi: 10.1111/dech.12002

Author Information

  1. Is Assistant Professor of Environmental Social Science at the National Institute of Development Administration, 118 Seri Thai Road, Bangkapi, Bangkok 10240 Thailand (e-mail: witchuda.s@nida.ac.th). Her recent research interest focuses specifically on climate change adaptation and mitigation in agriculture, while engaging with broader theoretical issues such as social justice, legitimacy and learning across different communities of practice.

*The author wishes to thank Arun Agrawal for encouragement and guidance, and the editors as well as the three anonymous referees for their useful comments and suggestions on earlier drafts of this article. This article is drawn from a chapter of the author's PhD dissertation conducted at the University of Michigan. The study was supported by the Rackham International Research Award and the Southeast Asian Regional Centre for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA) PhD Research Scholarship.

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 14 JAN 2013
  2. Article first published online: 14 JAN 2013

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (542K)

REFERENCES

  • Agrawal, A. (1995) ‘Dismantling the Divide between Indigenous and Scientific Knowledge’, Development and Change 26(3): 413–39.
    Direct Link:
  • Agrawal, A. (2002) ‘Indigenous Knowledge and the Politics of Classification’, International Social Science Journal 54(3): 287–97.
    Direct Link:
  • Altieri, M.A. (2002) ‘Agroecology: The Science of Natural Resource Management for Poor Farmers in Marginal Environments’, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 93(1–3): 1–24.
  • Altieri, M.A. (2004) ‘Linking Ecologists and Traditional Farmers in the Search for Sustainable Agriculture’, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2(1): 35–42.
  • Ashby, J.A. and L. Sperling (1995) ‘Institutionalizing Participatory, Client-Driven Research and Technology Development in Agriculture’, Development and Change 26(4): 753–70.
    Direct Link:
  • Austin, R. and J. Eder (2007) ‘Environmentalism, Development, and Participation on Palawan Island, Philippines’, Society and Natural Resources 20(4): 363–71.
  • Bänziger, M. and M. Cooper (2001) ‘Breeding for Low Input Conditions and Consequences for Participatory Plant Breeding: Examples from Tropical Maize and Wheat’, Euphytica 122(3): 503–19.
  • Barr, A. and M. Fafchamps (2006) ‘A Client–Community Assessment of the NGO Sector in Uganda’, Journal of Development Studies 42(4): 611–39.
  • Bellon, M.R., M. Smale, A. Aguirre, S. Taba, F. Aragón, J. Díaz et al. (2000) ‘Identifying Appropriate Germplasm for Participatory Breeding: An Example from the Central Valleys of Oaxaca, Mexico’. CIMMYT Economics Working Paper No 00–03. Mexico DF : CIMMYT.
  • Braun, A.R., G. Thiele and M. Fernández (2000) ‘Farmer Field Schools and Local Agricultural Research Committees: Complementary Platforms for Integrated Decision-Making in Sustainable Agriculture’. Agricultural Research and Extension Network Paper No 105. London : Overseas Development Institute.
  • vom Brocke, K., A. Christinck, R.E. Weltzein, T. Presterl and H.H. Geiger (2003) ‘Farmers’ Seed Systems and Management Practices Determine Pearl Millet Genetic Diversity Patterns in Semiarid Regions of India’, Crop Science 43: 1680–9.
  • Carberry, P.S. (2001) ‘Are Science Rigour and Industry Relevance Both Achievable in Participatory Action Research?’. Paper presented at the 10th Australian Agronomy Conference on Science and Technology: Delivering Results for Agriculture, Hobart , Australia (January).
  • Cash, D.W., W.C. Clark, F. Alcock, N.M. Dickson, N. Eckley, D.H. Guston et al. (2003) ‘Knowledge Systems for Sustainable Development’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(14): 8086–91.
  • Chang, T.T. (1976) ‘The Origin, Evolution, Cultivation, Dissemination, and Diversification of Asian and African Rices’, Euphytica 25(1): 425–41.
  • Conway, G. (1998) The Doubly Green Revolution: Food for All in the Twenty-First Century . Ithaca , NY : Cornell University Press.
  • Curtin, C.G. (2002) ‘Integration of Science and Community-Based Conservation in the Mexico/US Borderlands’, Conservation Biology 16(4): 880–6.
    Direct Link:
  • Dove, M.R. (2002) ‘Hybrid Histories and Indigenous Knowledge among Asian Rubber Smallholders’, International Social Science Journal 54(173): 349–59.
    Direct Link:
  • Dove, M.R., D.S. Smith, M.T. Campos, A.S. Mathews, A. Rademacher, S. Rhee et al. (2007) ‘Globalisation and the Construction of Western and Non-Western Knowledge’, in P. Sillitoe (eds.) Local Science vs. Global Science: Approaches to Indigenous Knowledge in International Development , pp. 129–54. New York : Berghahn Books.
  • Ellen, R. (2004) ‘From Ethno-Science to Science, or What the Indigenous Knowledge Debate Tells Us About How Scientists Define Their Projects’, Journal of Cognition and Culture 4(3): 409–50.
  • Ellis, S.C. (2005) ‘Meaningful Consideration? A Review of Traditional Knowledge in Environmental Decision Making’, Arctic 58(1): 66–77.
  • Fernando, J.L. (2003) ‘NGOs and Production of Indigenous Knowledge under the Condition of Postmodernity’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 590: 54–72.
  • Frank, R. and G. Stollberg (2004) ‘Conceptualizing Hybridization: On the Diffusion of Asian Medical Knowledge to Germany’, International Sociology 19(1): 71–88.
  • Gieryn, T.F. (1983) ‘Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists’, American Sociological Review 48(6): 781–95.
  • Gieryn, T.F. (1999) ‘Hybridizing Credibilities: Alber and Gabrielle Howard Compost Organic Waste, Science, and the Rest of Society’, in T.F. Gieryn Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line , pp. 233–335.
  • Gupta, A. (1998) Postcolonial Developments: Agriculture in the Making of Modern India . Durham , NC and London : Duke University Press.
  • Hailey, J. (2001) ‘Beyond the Formulaic: Process and Practice in South Asian NGOs’, in B. Cooke and U. Kothari (eds) Participation: The New Tyranny? , pp. 88–101. New York : Zed Books.
  • Hill, S. (1995) ‘Globalization or Indigenization: New Alignments between Knowledge and Culture’, Knowledge, Technology, and Policy 8(2): 88–112.
  • Jasanoff, S. (1997) ‘NGOs and the Environment: From Knowledge to Action’, Third World Quarterly 18(3): 579–94.
  • Johnson, B. and B. Hagstrom (2005) ‘The Translation Perspective as an Alternative to the Policy Diffusion Paradigm: The Case of the Swedish Methadone Maintenance Treatment’, Journal of Social Policy 34(3): 365–88.
  • Jongdee, B. and G. Pantuwan (2006) ‘Integration of Farmer Participatory Plant Breeding for Rainfed Lowland Rice Improvement in North and Northeast Thailand: II. Participatory Variety Selection (in Thai)’. Unpublished Project Report.
  • Joshi, K.D., M. Subedi, R.B. Rana, K.B. Kadayat and B.R. Sthapit (1997) ‘Enhancing on-Farm Varietal Diversity through Participatory Varietal Selection: A Case Study for Chaite Rice in Nepal’, Experimental Agriculture 33(3): 335–44.
  • Kelsey, E. (2003) ‘Integrating Multiple Knowledge Systems into Environmental Decision Making: Two Case Studies of Participatory Biodiversity Initiatives in Canada and their Implications for Conceptions of Education and Public Involvement’, Environmental Values 12(3): 381–96.
  • Koggel, C.M. (2008) ‘Theory to Practice and Practice to Theory? Lessons from Local NGO Empowerment Projects in Indonesia’, The Southern Journal of Philosophy XLVI: 111–30.
    Direct Link:
  • Lançon, J., S. Lewicki, M. Djaboutou, J. Chaume, E. Sekloka, L. Assogba et al. (2004) ‘Decentralized and Participatory Cotton Breeding in Benin: Farmer–Breeders’ Results Are Promising’, Experimental Agriculture 40(4): 419–31.
  • Long, N. and A. Long (eds) (1992) Battlefields of Knowledge: The Interlocking of Theory and Practice in Social Research and Development . London : Routledge.
  • Martin, A. (2003) ‘On Knowing What Trees to Plant: Local and Expert Perspectives in the Western Ghats of Karnataka’, Geoforum 34(1): 57–69.
  • McGuire, S.J. (2008) ‘Path-Dependency in Plant Breeding: Challenges Facing Participatory Reforms in the Ethiopian Sorghum Improvement Program’, Agricultural Systems 96(1–3): 139–49.
  • McGuire, S., G. Manicad and L. Sperling (1999) ‘Technical and Institutional Issues in Participatory Plant Breeding, Done from a Perspective of Farmer Plant Breeding: A Global Analysis of Issues and of Current Experience’. Working Document No 2. Washington , DC : CGIAR.
  • Nygren, A. (1999) ‘Local Knowledge in the Environment–Development Discourse: From Dichotomies to Situated Knowledges’, Critique of Anthropology 19(3): 267–88.
  • Rerkasem, B. (2005) ‘Local Rice Germplasm in Thailand's Changing Rice Farming Systems’. Paper presented at the Diversity, Management, Protection and Utilization of Local Rice Germplasm workshop, Chiang Mai University (1–2 August).
  • Rerkasem, B. and K. Rerkasem (2002) ‘Agrodiversity for in situ Conservation of Thailand's Native Rice Germplasm’, Chiang Mai University Journal 1(2): 129–48.
  • Rijal, D., R. Rana, A. Subedi and B. Sthapit (2000) ‘Adding Value to Landraces: Community-Based Approaches for in situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources in Nepal’, in E. Friis-Hansen and B. Sthapit (eds) Participatory Approaches to the Conservation and Use of Plant Genetic Resources , pp. 166–72. Rome : International Plant Genetic Resources Institute.
  • Rogers, E.M. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations (5th edn). New York : Free Press.
  • Salazar, R., N.P. Louwaars and B. Visser (2007) ‘Protecting Farmers’ New Varieties: New Approaches to Rights on Collective Innovations in Plant Genetic Resources’, World Development 35(9): 1515–28.
  • Scoones, I. and J. Thompson (1994) ‘Knowledge, Power and Agriculture: Towards a Theoretical Understanding’, in I. Scoones and J. Thompson (eds) Beyond Farmer First: Rural People Knowledge, Agricultural Research and Extension Practice , pp. 16–32. London : Intermediate Technology Publications.
  • Senanarong, A. and J. Sadakorn (1992) ‘Crop Genetic Improvement and Biodiversity Conservation in Thailand’. Paper presented at the 2nd Princess Jhulabhorn Science Congress, ‘Environment, Science and Technology: The Challenges of the 21st Century’, Bangkok (2–6 November).
  • Shrum, W. (2000) ‘Science and Story in Development: The Emergence of Non-Governmental Organizations in Agricultural Research’, Social Studies of Science 30(1): 95–124.
  • Stolle-McAllister, J. (2004) ‘Contingent Hybridity: The Cultural Politics of Tepoztlan's Anti-Golf Movement’, Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 11(2): 195–213.
  • Taylor, S. (2004) ‘The INGO, the Project, and the Investigation of “Indigenous Knowledge”’, in A. Bicker, P. Sillitoe and J. Pottier (eds) Investigating Local Knowledge: New Directions, New Approaches , pp. 129–48. Aldershot : Ashgate.
  • Thrupp, L.A. (1989) ‘Legitimatizing Local Knowledge: “Scientized Packages” or Empowerment for Third World People’, in D.M. Warren, L.J. Slikkerveer and S.O. Titilola (eds) Indigenous Knowledge Systems: Implications for Agriculture and International Development , pp. 138–53. Ames , IA : Iowa State University, Technology and Social Change Program.
  • Wejnert, B. (2002) ‘Integrating Models of Diffusion of Innovations: A Conceptual Framework’, Annual Review of Sociology 28: 297–326.
  • Winarto, Y.T. (2002) ‘From Farmers to Farmers, the Seeds of Empowerment: The Farmers’ Self Governance in Central Lampung’, in M. Sakai (eds) Beyond Jakarta: Regional Autonomy and Local Societies in Indonesia , pp. 270–89. Adelaide : Crawford House.
  • Witcombe, J.R., A. Joshi, K.D. Joshi and B.R. Sthapit (1996) ‘Farmer Participatory Crop Improvement: I. Varietal Selection and Breeding Methods and their Impact on Biodiversity’, Experimental Agriculture 32(4): 445–60.
  • Yifru, T. and K. Hammer (2006) ‘Farmers's Perception and Genetic Erosion of Tetraploid Wheats Landraces in Ethiopia’, Genetic Resources Crop Evolution 53(6): 1099–1113.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (542K)