Yrjo,
The model Laura presents on her home page captures perfectly the central
contradictions I personally felt lay at the center of the agricultural
change projects I worked on. Looks very interesting.
Paul H. Dillon
----- Original Message -----
From: Yrjo Engestrom <yengestr@ucsd.edu>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: Activity theory and agricultural change
> A doctoral student of mine at our Center in Helsinki, Laura Seppanen, is
> writing her PhD thesis on expansive learning in the transition from
> traditional to organic farming on two Finnish farms. Laura's home page is:
> http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/people/lauras.htm
>
> Cheers,
>
> Yrjo Engestrom
>
> > From: "Paul H.Dillon" <illonph@pacbell.net>
> > Reply-To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:27:04 -0700
> > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > Subject: Activity theory and agricultural change
> > Resent-From: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> > Diane writes,
> >
> >> YES!!!! institutions , by their historical structure, can NOT endorse
> >> learning III
> >> because this invariably calls the institution itself into question -
> >> again, i think an actual context would help me - a specific activity -
> >> like introducing new agriculture technologies into rural communities,
and
> >> what kinds of structures are
> >> involved - beliefs, values, histories, traditions, ideologies,
politics -
> >> these are, to me,
> >> particular to the context, and so potentially more expansive in terms
of
> >> OUR learning here.
> >
> > A lot of the time I think about activity theory and the ideas expressed
in
> > LBE in relation to the problems of technology transfer, particularly in
the
> > Andes, since I worked there and in that field (applied anthropology)
for
> > about 10 years. The problem is complex since there are so many
different
> > actors involved in processes of technology transfer and their are a lot
of
> > different kinds of technologies, too. Most of the time, the new
> > technologies, are oriented to the production of market crops and often
> > require a lot of purchased inputs -- ranging from the seed itself,
through
> > various kinds of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. Technology
> > transfer, in this context, can only be viewed from the perspective of
the
> > expansion of market systems and many of the foreign aid organizations
(eg,
> > USAID) realize that the change of agricultural technology is only
feasible
> > when other conditions ranging from technical support to roads to
irrigation
> > systems to market storage facilities, etc. are in place as well. So, if
> > change of ag technology is viewed as a type of learning, it must be seen
as
> > something subordinate to a transformation of the entire system at
numerous
> > other levels as well. Another way to say this is: improved agricultural
> > technologies rarely help the poorest farmers because they dwell in areas
> > where the conditions for market economies are weak and can't be
artificially
> > transformed through government intervention where there are market
> > economies.
> >
> > Then too, there is the entire range of so called "appropriate
technologies"
> > in which the extension people do not go out with a specific technology
to
> > offer but rather go out with a took kit of possible technologies and
> > approaches and work collaboratively with the people to develop systems
that
> > fit the needs and the possibillities. These approaches look a lot more
like
> > Freirean type interventions and his ideas have been seminal in a lot of
that
> > work. In some cases I think there is often an implicit activity systems
> > type approach. One of these is known as "farm systems analysis" and it
> > basically starts from an examination of the agricultural production unit
in
> > terms of all of the internal and external relations that make it up
with
> > reference to the basic productive activity. Interventions are based on
an
> > in-depth familarity with that totality and include an understanding of
all
> > of the various social and cultural elements. (They hired a lot of
> > anthropologists to work on farming systems analysis-oriented af
> > development projects for that very reason. Farm systems analysis was a
> > very important approach the last time I was working in this area (1989)
but
> > I've been out of the field for some time now. I wouldn't be surprised
if it
> > isn't so important anymore, not because it wasn't effective and
successful,
> > but because it didn't really focus on producing capitalist farms and, in
> > some sense reinforced, the peasant sectors, since it aimed to give them
the
> > ability to withstand the fluctuations in the market prices. As you
might
> > well imagine, this didn't set well with the U of Chicago oriented
economists
> > for whom such "obstructions" to the price-mechanism represent limits to
the
> > operation of the market whose freedom from constraint they believe (or
at
> > least maintain) is necessary for "democratic society", etc.
> >
> > Anyway, you're right, it's an interesting area for the extension of more
> > self-conscious activity theoretic ideas and I'm sure, if you're
interested,
> > that a quick look into farm systems analysis would be fruitful.
> >
> > Paul H. Dillon
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 01 2001 - 01:00:59 PDT