From honeybee@iimahd.ernet.inWed Apr 5 23:17:08 1995 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 10:01:10 -0700 From: Kirit K Patel Reply to: indknow@u.washington.edu To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Indknow and IPM-strategies From: A R Pastakia Doctoral Student Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, INDIA Honeybee@iimahd.ernet.in In my thesis work I have been studying the heuristics used by grassroots innovators for arriving at innovative solutions in the area of sustainable pest management in agriculture. It is clear from the data that these heuristics are influenced by both internal variables (world-view, beliefs, value system, knowledge base) as well as external variables (ecological, economic and social context of the innovator). I am listing two points which came up during discussions and on which i would request comments. 1) We have found compartmentalisation of life-spaces, to be a common phenomenon when it comes to decisions related to resource use and choice of technology. For instance the decisions related to crop pests, to animal health and health of own children may not invoke the same criteria/values. The question therefore is whether consistency across life spaces is a necessary condition for innovation and adoption of technology with high potential for sustainable outcomes? 2) It is generally believed that chemical intensive farming is non-sustainable on account of the externalities on soils, water and other natural resources. The longitudinal data from Rothemstead Research Station (over 125 years) in the U.K. seems to indicate that there is no drop in productivity despite use of chemical inputs over extended period of time. Is there information available on the long term impact on soil microbiology profile, soil fertility, stability and resilience of the agro-ecology on the Rothemstead Station ?