Survey of Farmers Innovations for Sustainable Agriculture:  

Do methods matter?

Anil K Gupta 
Professor
Centre For Management in Agriculture
and
Chairperson
Centre for Educational Innovation
and
Kirit K Patel
Associate Editor
Honey Bee

1992
Indian Institute of Management
Ahmedabad-380015

Paper Presented at International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and  Environment (SaFE)   organized by UPASI Research and Development, Kottayam -686 001, Kerala, India,28-30 April, 1993.

The draft of this paper was presented  earlier at International Conference on Indigenous Knowledge and Sustainable Development, IIRR, Silang, Cavite, Philippines, Sept 20-26, 1992

Survey of Innovations for Sustainable Development:  

Do methods matter?

Anil K Gupta and Kirit K Patel

Context:

Searching under the Light:  Methods do Matter (But for What?)  There is an old Indian story of an aged woman.  She was searching for something under a night lamp in a street.  A person passing by asked her about what she was looking for.  She said she had lost a stitching needle.  The person asked as to where the needle was lost.  The lady replied, inside the house.  The person was baffled.  He asked then why was she searching it in the street.  The lady replied because there was a light.  

Many researchers and scholars have done the same mistake of looking for ideas and innovations where the light was rather than where it was embedded.  When we begin our search for innovations an evidence of local experimentation as well as conceptualization of sustainable technologies and institutions, we face the similar dilemma.  Lot of researchers particularly trained in the western tradition might like to search ideas where the light is.  The light may be among the articulated people or the articulation may be sought in the external idiom.  When we ask people to do wealth ranking, draw maps or do quick discussions, what we convey to the people is, “I want to understand what you do and how.  But I want to do it in my language and my metaphor.  Understanding your metaphor in language would require studying your culture, institutions and history.  I am in hurry and in any case what can one learn from a history full of deprivation, poverty and conflicts.”

These values show up repeatedly when trivia is celebrated and the profound is passed over.  For instance I heard one scholar narrating with the great excitement, how he noticed an indigenous solid and water conservation structure which was missed by a NGO working in that area for a long time.  What the scholar was conveying related to his discovery and attributable apparently to his keen observation rather than to any particular method.  Like many other poorly specified causal models, a theory got built which had lot of chaff and only little grain.  Our contention is that ratio of chaff to grain should really be the yard stick for evaluating any method.  
Thus, one should look at the number of innovations, insights about indigenous ecological knowledge system and the quality of relationship to the people while appraising the simple methods like ours and the sophisticated methods like RRA marketed with a backup of multi million dollar aid lobby.  If what we are suggesting appears demystified and simple enough to be improvised by any user, then three things might happen.  One, any industry based on training practitioners and scholars in our method may not come up; two, we may not get satisfaction of false theorization; three, we may not be able to reinforce low-self image of third world professionals implying that even for understanding their own knowledge traditions they have to import spectacles and binoculars from the west.  Since to us all the three things are immaterial, our rewards are extremely enriching and network is growing at unimaginable pace.  Perhaps we have stirred a chord in many hearts.
There are many other implications of developing indigenous approaches to learning indigenous innovation.  
a)	There is a systematic pattern in the organizations and the professionals who have fallen for rapid methods.  Large NGOs funded by international agencies staffed by urban bred professionals have been most eager to get the consultants ‘specializing’ in rapid methods for getting a key to unlock local minds.  Similarly, exceptions apart most of the professionals falling for these methods have shown a distinct disdain for studying local vernacular literature and even in English language, have avoided old literature.  Such derooted organizations and individuals may find in rapid methods, an easy way of perceived legitimacy among the local people.  This to our mind is a naive assumption.  

b)	Formulizing a process in many cases takes away the spirit underlying the enquiry.  Many times we don’t realise that in most traditional societies there exist tremendous respect and restraint vis-a-vis outsiders.  Thus when people keep patience with our pranks, we should be careful and not miss the underlying hostility.  One way to search this hostility is to look for local acronyms or metaphors generated by people regarding our methods.  Gupta (1982) has suggested that metaphors are like memory cells.  They help in retaining complex ideas and information in a simple and often funny imageries.  These are also a short hand for communication within a culture.  The emic meanings require  a patient and perseverance approach to uncover their importance.  

c)	The short cuts are generally known to breed an extractive  mentality which is a total variance with a genuine participative culture.  Further, short cuts are bad as an ethical value and are non sustainable precisely for this reason.  People can always see through a genuine and not so genuine seeker of knowledge.  At the same time people may forgive indiscretions on the part of some one who has otherwise been very helpful.  Thus, a voluntary worker may find that the hostility to his short cuts in one subset of relationship with people may remain suppressed because the concerned worker is extremely sincere in other subsets.  But sooner or later the cracks developed.

d)	The accountability to people about learning is very necessary.  If we share with people in local language what we learnt or at least what we tell others about what we learnt, we will realize that people would not always keep patience with our laboured ways of understanding simple things.  The feedback generates new knowledge which is unattainable for many other method (Gupta 1981, 1983).  This feedback serves two purposes.  One, it helps in avoiding blunders though mistakes may still remain.  Two, it satisfies the ethical requirement that we use any information only with the explicit permission of the source.  Often the respondents realize the context of the enquiry only when we feedback what we learnt.  Most practitioners of RRA and PRA have not shared to our knowledge their learning in local vernacular language with the people from whom they learnt whatever little they did.  

e)	For those who may have forgotten, it may be useful to recall that the discipline of anthropology originally began to understand the native mind so that it could be controlled and colonized (Huizer 1981).  It is true that over time considerable introspection has taken place and extremely liberating concepts, approaches and frameworks have emerged.  I have no doubt that once the methodocentric professionals begin introspection about various hazards inherent in their approach, they would begin to modify both the meaning and the form.  
f)	The measure or scale by which we judge utility of an insight should be the parameter for evaluating relative worth of different methods.  For instance, in one case just a description of a reality may be the outcome of an enquiry.  In another case rather than getting the entire description we may get the important building blocks of the local knowledge structure.  The former approach may be useful for one’s own education.  The latter helps in extending not only the frontiers of science but also the boundaries of what we think, in addition to educating us.  The conceptual contribution by the indigenous knowledge system is being highlighted in the next point.  
g)	The local knowledge may sometime be embedded local institutions which are not easy to understand or uncover.  While rapid methods may fail to uncover these institutions in almost all cases.  The alternative method/approach based on trust, accountability and demystification may also fail to help uncover the institutional dimensions directly.  However, in the alternative method, conditions are created in which subsequent search for institutional context of individual or group innovations can indeed be pursued.
.lm
Having enumerated some of the major limitations of the current methods, let us describe the alternative approach evolved by us through part strategy and part muddling through.  Let us warn the readers that if they find approach too simple, they should only remember what Konrad Lorenz (Riedl, 1984) observed: Nature is very parsimonious.  It has only a few patterns which it plays with in different combinations.  The key to understanding indigenous innovations lies in some simple truths, we believe to be valid universally.  

Honey Bee Philosophy:
The search for indigenous innovations is a long one as described in part one.  However, different dimensions of the process have been analyzed at different times and in a few cases through accidents. Gupta (1988) met  Ram Nivas of Janjaria Was village,  while doing a study of farmers training centres and farmers discussion forum in villages of a drought prone district.  Ram Nivas had a rich repertoire of indigenous ways of perceiving environment and developing proxy variables for deciding various agricultural operations.  For instance, the behaviour of ants, flowering of some wild plants, sighting of birds, etc., were supposed to indicate optimal time of performing various farm operations.  Similarly, the reason for formal organization like farmer training centre not being able to get a feed back of this kind was traced to the structure of communication and power as illustrated through following matrix [Gupta (1980)] (Fig. 1)..ls 1
Power

One way            Two way      
.lm 0.5"  
 One way           

 Two way	

 No way     
We are also hoping that the network of innovators in due course would hold us accountable for the resources we generate in their name.  It is a tragedy that the intellectuals would like every other institution in  society to be accountable except themselves.  
Method of survey:
We have tried to collect farmers’ innovations through (a) direct survey in the field with the help of students in their summer vacation; (b) scientists, professionals and NGOs working with the people; and (c) survey of literature both in vernacular languages as well as in English published decades ago or now.
Survey through students:
There are eighteen Gandhian institutions in Gujarat which try to combine learning and working in the field together.  Most of the students come from rural areas.  A large number come from tribal areas. They complete a degree course, viz., Bachelor of Rural Studies (BRS).  In the first year, we took help of two of these institutions, viz., Gram Bharati, Amarapur; and Lok Bharati Sanosara.  Their students were invited for a day long meeting during their summer vacation.
Explaining the Context:
After explaining the context of the study, the importance of learning from farmers, need for protecting the intellectual property rights of people, they are asked to narrate examples of intriguing/interesting/innovative practices from their own home, village or neighborhood.  By underlining the ones which are interesting or unusual, the purpose of our survey becomes slowly and slowly clear to the student researchers.  
Building upon Known and Acknowledgement as Motivator:
The main trick here is to build upon what people/students already know.  The fact that young students notice glow in our eyes after hearing some of their experiences does lot of good to their self- confidence and commitment for the purpose.  When we show Honey Bee issues to the successive batches from 18 Gram Vidya Peeths (Village Studies Institutions), they see that we have acknowledged not only the farmers innovators but also the communicators.  Acknowledgement acts as a source of great motivation.   
Searching for Odd Balls:
We have often been asked as to how did we identify so many innovators in such a little time.  Some people believed that innovations might only be available in drought or flood prone regions, hill or forest areas.  Some others asked for a questionnaire that we may have used.  We never used any questionnaire nor did we emphasize other formal methods.  
The principle was to look for odd balls, crazy people or people who did experiments, tried different things and often have been butt of the local humour.  It is not that other people don’t experiment, but just like anywhere else in society, some people are more creative than others.  Generally everybody in the village knows about such people.  Some of these people are local experts for bone setting, veterinary surgery or medicine or trying out crazy experiments in farming.  Many of these odd balls are also extremely sensitive and shy.  Thus, any mistake in seeking their help may create barriers. 
Some of these people, of course, are not very eloquent about what we may call very new or innovative.  It is possible that a practice which is localized or common place in a community might be extremely innovative for another region, community or context. It is for such practices that the orientation of the student researchers becomes or is particularly helpful.  By highlighting the practices that we like, we communicate what kind of information we are looking for.  Despite all this care, at least half of the practices are either already known to us or often very common (though might appear uncommon to these students).  This is inevitable in any such enquiry.  
We have a check list about basic information regarding village, individual respondent, ecological context, nature of technology, sources of idea, whether first time developed or improvized, any side effects or precautions or risks associated with the practice, extent of coverage among people or in the region of the practice, plans for future improvisation, etc (see annexure 1 for the list).  We must admit that in most cases we do not get all the information.  Since in the first round of survey we do not insist on details we prefer to get as many leads for subsequent follow up as possible.  Sometimes, discussions with the individuals become a group discussion.  People in the villages are generally curious whenever an outsider visits.  Such discussions can be helpful if a competitive spirit emerges.  At such a moment people may try to give examples better or different than the one being narrated.  When the narrator feels constrained, there is no alternative but to abandon the discussion.  
There is no mystery or technique involved in above interaction.  Anybody with faith, commitment, sincerity, transparency, and a sharp eye can do as well a job.  Only caution we want to advise is that any attempt to be conceited or clever back fires.  Also, home work and mental preparation helps.  Pride of pursuit, no doubt, provides the extra edge that is so necessary for traversing long distances on foot and in search of odd balls.  
Comparing Two Knowledge Systems:
Samples of various plant and other materials are collected for identification by the knowledgeable experts like botanists, taxonomists etc.  Even though some of our colleagues do not agree with the need for validating indigenous practices through modern scientific methods, we for the time being are living with this contradiction.  Some of the principles very deeply embedded in local knowledge systems are not even recognized in the modern systems.  For instance there is no concept of heat or cold producing foods for animals or human beings in modern science.  
The identified plant samples are being screened through the NAPRALERT data base at University of Illinois, Chicago.  This is one of the largest data bases on indigenous knowledge about plants though with special emphasis on pharmacological applications.  We have discovered several plants on which no citation exists.  It is important in the context of the fact that NAPRALERT database has information on about 90 thousand different plants and scans about 500 journals every month (Farnsworth, 1992).  There are many users of already known plants which have not been reported before. 
Feeding Back Data to Farmers:
As mentioned earlier all the practices are communicated back to the communicators as a part of vernacular Honey Bee.  Many farmers and labourers have responded back with suggestions and comments about our effort.  In successive years the goodwill so created helps our student researchers a great deal.  
A video film has been prepared on the basis of the four innovations by artisans in dry part of Gujarat with the help of Development Education Communication Unit of Indian Space Research Organization at Ahmedabad.  The film prepared by Jayantibhai Patel has been broadcast on regional television.  It was also shown back in the village where two of the most interesting innovation on wheat sowing box and groundnut digger were developed.  
Traveling Seminars:
Unlike plant or other material based innovations, the farm implement based innovations are more difficult to visualize without seeing the machinery.  In a workshop of innovative artisans, we realized last year that the discussion could not have been pursued without actually seeing the equipments.  Accordingly we planned a traveling seminar.  Several of the artisans together with us visited each other’s work shop.  Given our own limited knowledge of farm implements, we merely observed the dialogue among the innovators.  The experience taught us not merely about the innovation per se or the process of peer group dialogue but also about a major reason for lack of evolution and diffusion of innovations.  
The gap was absence of a peer group and a platform for regular critique of the respective ideas.  It seems that the individual hit and trial method served the purpose but very slowly and often not to the best potential of the individual or group innovators.  
We are very conscious of the major weakness of the global dialogue on innovations which is networking the researchers on innovations but not the innovators themselves.  In our own effort we have tried to overcome this limitation.  
Significance of Our Survey Approach:
To summarize, the method we have followed involves some of the basic principles of logic, enquiry, commitment and accountability.  .ls 1.lm .5"
a)	Building upon what researchers or people know is a non-threatening, liberating, participative method.

b)	By comparing and contrasting what is known, one can communicate what is to be known or inquired more precisely than giving examples in the beginning itself.  

c)	Demystification of expert power is necessary if genuine collegiality has to be developed.  By building upon the experiences of the students about which we knew nothing we demonstrated empirically our willingness to learn.  The dominance of our institutional contexts and role was also reduced and students coming from villages were empowered.

d)	A check list of key dimensions is helpful but trade off between filling the check lists and looking for an incomplete but exciting insight has to be made in favour of the latter. A great damage is done if one insists on complete information in the very first round.  The focus gets shifted from exciting to routine.  

e)	Search for odd balls or unusual people and practices requires respect for deviance both in the outcome of research and in the process.  Those students would try to follow their own style or take initiative to do things that may not have been suggested have to be nurtured.  

f)	Every practice must be fed back in local language to the farmers but also to the researcher students.  To treat them as a staff takes away the larger goal of generating curiosity among young minds.  

g)	One of the unintended but very positive outcome  of such a process is that it links young with the old.   Given the unfortunate development of our age, the link between older and younger has become weaker.  Since many of the older practices and skills have to be learnt from older people, dialogue with them become necessary.  

h)	The institutional context of technological innovation is no less important.  The knowledge is embedded, validated and renewed in a cultural context.  This context often is specific to a community or location.  But some times it can be valid over larger space or social boundary.  It may not be necessary to insist that entire institutional context is analyzed while collecting the information about specific innovations.  Excessive theorization some time may obscure ability to either perceive reality or interpreted, not with- standing what Popper said.  
Part II:  Patterns in Innovations 
The process of innovation is neither random nor without any direction.  While a proper taxonomy of the innovations remains to be developed (we are working on it), we intend to briefly review some of the important dimensions emerging from our work.  
The process can be classified into five categories viz:  (a) Conceptual transformation, (b) Improvisation, (c) Accidental or serendipity, (d) Collective or individual processes, (e) Triggering new metaphors, (f) Funny processors, and institutions for humour.  These processes can manifest in four ways - religious, cultural, socio-economic and political.  Each one of these may be multi-dimensional and may involve underlying agronomic or biological logic.  

Various innovations may draw upon different kinds of materials for example botanicals (plant derived compounds), locally available compounds, chemicals or spices, modern manufactured inputs, various kinds of wooden, iron or earthen artifacts, biological organisms or micro organisms, various kinds of fumigation, etc.  In addition farmers may use different physical mechanisms to transform the context of the problem.  This is just an illustrative list because most innovations go beyond just the materials.  

If we analyze any innovation, it may require,  a) Materials, b) Proportion and c) Principles.
Any indigenous recipe draws upon some materials often available locally and having been used repeatedly.  These materials are combined in specific proportions derived through theories (for example as given in Ayurveda) or through hit and trial.  Certain principles determine the conditions under which the given materials and the proportions are supposed to work.  Not all these principles are analyzable in the context of modern rationality.  Although rationality may be inherent but it may not be utilitarian in nature.  The logic may be philosophical or cultural.  For instance certain practices may have to be done in a particular condition of sanitation.  It may be difficult to 
specify those conditions.  Therefore the practice may require that the person takes bath and wears either new cloths or washed cloths.  Another way of pursuing sanitation may be avoiding certain practices to be performed by women in menstrual period.  In the given conditions either the women might be weak and thus may need to be given rest.  Or the waste blood might emanate smells  which might not be conducive for a particular practice.  In some cases the conditions might be pure superstitions.  

The principles also imply the complimentarity or contradiction between different technologies, recipes or practices.  In this sense the principles are the underlying theory.  Though it may not be articulated very precisely.  The principles therefore provide the context.  The material and proportions provide the content.  

Process of Innovation:.lm .5"
1)	Conceptual transformation:
Some of the innovations transform fundamentally the way in which we think about the problem.  It may happen either by using a material in totally unexpected way or by devising a solution which may not have been thought through ever before.  In either case such innovations can indeed extend the frontier of science.  To illustrate, an artisan viz. Amritbhai Agrawat of Junagadh district in Gujarat was asked by a farmer to devise an implement which can spread seeds horizontally in a furrow evenly spaced.  In Saurashtra region (drought prone part of Gujarat) conventionally set and furrow system of sowing is followed.  When farmers sow seed of wheat in furrows by conventional pipe-based seed sowing system, the seeds fall in a line one over another leaving space on both the sides of the line unutilized.  Given low moisture availability, the farmer wanted the same seed quantity to be so spread that the moisture may be utilized in the entire furrow.  

A wheat sowing box as shown below (figure 2) was developed to solve the problem.  To the best of our 

knowledge, such a sowing equipment does not exist anywhere else in the world.  When we take into account the cost (about 3 dollars per box), complimentality with the existing multipurpose tool bar and easy repairability, the innovation is truly remarkable.  
In second case an unusual method of controlling RNA virus- based diseases in plants and animals was devised using milk which has extended the boundary of discipline in virology.  

In Andhra Pradesh in South India, Tobacco growers put their hands in a pot of fresh milk every time after transplanting a few seedlings.  This is reportedly done to prevent diffusion of Tobacco Mosaic Virus (TMV).  Dr. Chari, Director of Central Tobacco Research Institute had told me this practice, when I inquired about examples of farmers’ practices which they had found exciting.

In Gujarat, we came across a practice reported by Thakor Morarji based on the experience of Chhaganbhai Bhimjibhai of District Amreli in which farmers pour milk on the hooves of the animals, affected by Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD).

When I was a child and had a pain in the ear, mother’s milk was put to give some relief.  I asked the molecule biologists and other scientists present in the conference to speculate some relationship between these three practices.  Dattananda, a Ph.D. scholar from Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, came to me after the session and offered a tentative explanation.  He referred to a experiment at CCMB looking into the reason for very high incidence of breast cancer among Parsee women.  Dr. Das who had conducted these experiments reportedly found that the milk of these women had a very low content of Rnase enzyme.  Dattananda hypothesized that since both the viruses i.e. TMV and FMD were RNA viruses, it was possible that this enzyme in the fresh milk neutralized the viruses.  He also added later that some enzymes like proteases might also be available to break into the protein coat of the viruses.

Whether this is a correct explanation or not, I do not know, But it has certainly some merit in terms of the precise hypothesis which can be easily tested.  And perhaps some readers will test it and write back to us.  The farmers’ practices thus have to be looked into carefully to identify the core concepts.  Value can then be added to these concepts with the modern science and technology.  In some cases, the frontier of science itself will expand in the light of these concepts (Gupta 1991, Honey Bee 3(2) 1992: 2-3).
This is the most widely applicable category of the innovation.  In large number of cases small incremental changes made over a long time by several people help improve the efficiency. The case of the multi purpose tool bar is one good example of this kind. So many innovations have been made in its use, attachments and design that it is difficult to identify the exact source of any specific change. Basant(1990) made some effort to study at least four major sources of simultaneous attempts to innovate the design. Many of the agronomic practices also developed in the similar way. 

3)  Accidental or serendipity:
In Deesa district, a farmer - Nandu Ram Kalu Ram Verma- had faced a constraint of labour and resources at the time of sowing potato. He opened furrow and directly seeded the potato on flat bed( Khatana and Upadhyay, Honey Bee 3(2)1992:8-9). The yield was better than the normal raised bed method. It has become now a widespread practice. 

Sukhatme who developed the first commercial herbal pesticide viz: Indiara narrated two interesting cases to Gupta in 1989. Once one of his friend was sitting in his farm and mustard grains were lying under the sun for drying purpose. A cow passing by started eating the mustard grains and soon developed toxicity symptoms. Sukhatme when learned about it used the idea and extracted a toxic substance for the herbal pesticide. Similarly, another friend of his had some irrigation pipes lying outside his farm house. After spraying Indiara, he sprinkled the left over portion on these pipes. There was a serious problem in that area of underground PVC pipes being damaged by the rats. It was observed that the pipes sprayed with indiara did not suffer from this limitation. A new use of Indiara was discovered which was neither known to the innovator-Sukhatme, nor to the first user..lm
4)  Collective or Individual processes.lm.5"
It is slowly being realized that most of the sustainable technologies require group action at some stage or the other to be widely effective. A very interesting practice was observed in Valia taluka of Bharuch District. 

About 15 kms. away from this place another farmer (Botabhai M. Rajvadiya) suggested leaves of another plant. Use of plant ‘Keji’ found in hedge bearing small leaves was better.  According to him, 5-7 persons are required for one acre of crop.  This practice is very common for maize and bajra crop in this area.  Vasava Rupajibhai Kalibhai, Vill: Vagalkhor, Via : Bhilod, Tal : Valia, Dist: Bharuch,  Comm: Mr. Pandya (Principal, Higher Secondary School, Thava). Botabhai M. Rajvadiya, Vill: Dodvada, Taluka : Valiya, Dist: Bharuch. Honey Bee 3(2) 1992:19.
There are many other practices which require group action such as fumigation, quarantine and collection of the pest larva etc. There are some practices for which group action is not necessary but desirable or optimal ( most practices for watershed or pest management may fall into this category).

In Bhutan, Foot and mouth disease has been a very serious source of mortality in cattle.  In Komathanga village of Wagudi, a very careful arrangement had been worked out  to prevent its diffusion.  If the village cattle got infected with this disease, two outposts were set up outside the village in the directions from where outsiders usually came.  People from the village took turn to man these posts.  No cattle from outside was allowed to enter the village lest it got also infected.  Even the people visiting the village had to spend overnight at these checkposts before coming to the village.  This was a case where an institution had emerged not to optimize returns to individual or village.  But to generate positive externality.  It might be possible that if everybody reciprocated such a gesture, the diffusion of disease would of course be much lesser( Gupta and Ura, 1992).
The individual practices may have been used at individual level but appraised or validated at group level. When some body’s crop field is noticed to be very good or livestock is known to perform very well, people often inquire individually or collectively about the reason. Thus the process of innovation taking place at individual level is influenced by the feed back as well as curiosity of the group. 
5) Triggering New Metaphor
The process of innovation may some time trigger new metaphors either to embed the practice in the given cultural context or to use available sources of fears or hopes. Some times it is just the expression of local preferences or biases. In some areas farmers considered a particular disease a ‘brahmin’ disease ( i.e. high caste or social status) and offered country wine to the animals. Whether the alcoholic content helped in deworming the animals or provides relief from some other infections remains to be seen. But this practice was mentioned as a proven remedy for certain ailments in a book on ‘Agriculture in Bombay Presidency written in 1905. We have found it prevalent in Gujarat villages even today. .lm
6) Innovations for Fun or humour
Richards( 1989) and Gupta(1990)  have called these kind of innovations ‘Playful’ or part of ‘Playful portfolios’ respectively. The first implies  that the practice itself is funny and that is the purpose. The latter implies that in any mix of activities that poor people evolve, some are serious but some have to be funny just in order to make life bearable. The meaning of funny content can thus be appreciated in the context of the total portfolio rather than at the practice level. Perriera( 1990,1992) has done extraordinarily rich work on the indigenous knowledge system. Shankar Karpali, a tribal Warli farmer grows a paddy variety with purple leaves. He is proud of the fact that he only cultivates this variety and believes that it averts evil eye. One possible functional value is that it helps in removing green weeds in a field full of purple paddy( Bernard in Perriera, 1992). 
The issue of local Knowledge system has to be seen not merely from the utilitarian perspective but from the semiotic, value building or analytical perspective also.  
We have to look at cultural, spiritual and historical aspect of the technology development and diffusion both at individual as well as collective level.  There is no way by which knowledge systems can grow if the traditional cultural anchors are not properly located. 
Short Cut Methods to learning have to be abandoned both, on the grounds of efficiency and ethics. Any attempt to deroot people or scholars and cut their historical context away from their day to day search of sustainable solution is bound to prove short lived. 
Global Networking
We invite readers to join the effort at Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad to set up a global Honey Bee network of innovators  as well as researchers working on local innovations and their global implications.  We firmly believe that while we should collaborate with all the like minded groups in the west or east like CIKARD, ACTS or other groups that we do not know about. But we do not think that Core or the Centre of an accountable, participative and mutually supportive global network based on the innovations by third world farmers should be nay where else than in third world. Since we believe, we have  one of the largest data base on the subject, we appeal to all the colleagues to own our dream, give it your energy, ethos and esteem. We are willing to join any other global network but with centre in third world. 

However, we do not think that any body who does not believe in empirical work, voluntary spirit, accountability to people particularly disadvantaged groups, obligation to share our learning with the respondents in their language and commitment to protect the intellectual property rights of the innovators at grass root level will find our network a very congenial niche to grow. We are greatly impressed by the extraordinary support we are finding for Honey Bee network. We are hopeful that one day we would have local language editions in different countries of the world. Effort for Sinhalese version in Srilanka are already under way. A note describing our expectations from the collaborators is enclosed in Annexure two.
We hope that the spirit of Honey Bee will trigger better, more efficient and effective initiatives so that we can learn from them and improve our ability to work with innovators in third world as well as economically developed and ecologically underdeveloped Western world. 
We are prosing an International society called as SRISHTI i.e. Society for Research and interventions for Sustainable Technologies and Institutions. The word Srishti in Sanskrit means cosmos and also creation.  May the spirit of creativity and accountability permeate our collective efforts.

Annexure 1-a
Plant Protection.ls1

1.  Name & address of farmer:
2.  Name & address of Communicator:
3.  Local name of the practice:
4.  Local name(s) of the insect pest:
5.  When does it  appear?:
6.  Mode of damage:
7.  The most preferable part for the pest:
8.  Brief description of the pest :
(life cycle, phenotype, habit etc.)
9.  Preferable host crops:
10. Time of causing severe damage
11. Preferable Environmental conditions 
12. Any relationship between plant and pest:
13. Reason for appearing of this pest:
14. Name of the treatment:
15. Name and proportion of different ingredients:
16. Name of the plant along with brief description, if any: *
17. Name of local chemicals along with available information, 
if any:
18. Method of preparing recipe:
19. Precaution required for preparation or application of recipe:
20. Dose of application:
21. Method of application:
22. Duration to show the effectiveness:
23. Method of evaluating the effectiveness:
24. Precautions for the application of the treatment:
25. Is he an original innovator or only a follower:
26. Source of this idea:
27. No.of people who adopted this method :
28. Since how long :
29. Is there any change of this method:
30. Any other alternative for controlling this pest:
31: Any other risk:

Annexure:1-b

Animal Husbandry

1.  Name of farmer:
2.  Address of farmer:
3.  Name & Address of communicator:
4.  Local name of disease:
5.  Symptoms of the disease:
6.  Type of susceptible host( specie):
7.  Name of treatment:
8.  Procedure of treatment:
9.  Local name of plant * (if any used):
10. Useful part of the plant:
11. Brief description of the plant:
(Soil & climate requirement, height, flowering etc.)
12. Dose of treatment:
13. Duration to show the  effect:
14. Precautions for taking treatment:
15. Method of evaluating the effectiveness :
16. Any side effects:
17. No. of people who  practice this treatment?
18. Since, how long?:
19. Any expert known for this method:
20. Is he an original innovator or only a practitioner?
21. What is the origin of the  idea ?;
22. Any alternative suggested to  this method?
23. Is there any alternative way of having similar treatment?

*  Plant sample should be taken from the original site advised by  the innovator.  It should be dried properly and pasted on the hard sheet as used in the herbarium.  Following information should be collected at the time of taking the sample. 

1. Name & address of farmer:
2.  Name & address of communicator:
3.  Local name(s) of plant:
4.  Soil requirement:
5.  Climate requirement:
6.  Description of plant in brief (Season, type, life etc.)
7.  Time, color, type of flower:
8.  Useful part of the plant for innovation:
9.  Method of propagation:
10. Peculiar character of identification:
11. Uses of plant in brief:
12. Place of availability of plant:
Select Bibliography

Arnold Pacey, Technology in World Civilization A Thousand -
Year History, Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1990.

Atte David O.Indigenous local knowledge as a key to local-level development: Possibilities, Constraints and Planning Issues in the Context of Africa Seminar on Reviving Local Self-Reliance: Challenges for Rural/Regional Development in Eastern and Southern Africa, 21-24 February, 1989, Arusha, Tanzania.

Agriculture in Ancient India (1964). ICAR, New Delhi.

Balasubramanian A, Traditional Plant Protection Methods in Tamil Nadu.  (In Biological Methods of Pest Control Proceeding of the Southern Regional Seminar Edited by K. Vijayalakshmi, Nov. 21-22, 1988.  PPST Foundation Madras, pp 34-38)

Dennis Michael Warren, Indigenous Knowledge and Development (revised version), Seminar Series on Sociology and Natural Resource Management, Agriculture Department, The World Bank, Washington, D.C. 20433, Dec. 3, 1990.                                                                                                                                                         

Dharam Pal (1983). Indian Science and Technology in the Eighteenth Century, lAcademy of Gandhian Studies, Hyderabad, pp. 229-256.

Gehlot H., Preservation of farm animals  Udaya Art Printing Press, Jodhpur, 1933, 140.

Gupta Anil K, Scientific Perception  of Farmers Innovations in Dry Regions, Barrier to Scientific Curiosity (IIM, WP. No 738, 1987, presented at international Conference on Farmers Participatory Research, July 1987, Modified version persented at International Sociological Italy, June, 1988) pp 1-18.

Gupta Anil K., Jyoti Kapoor and Rekha shah, Inventory of peasant innovations for sustainable Development an annotated bibliography, Centre for Management in Agriculture.  Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad. 1990.

Gupta Anil K Building Upon Peoples’  Ecological  Knowledge:   Framework  for   Studying   Culturally Embedded  CPR  Institutions.  Presented at the Second Annual Conference of  the  International  Association  for  the  Study  of Common  Property,  Winnipeg,  Manitoba,  26  -  29  September, 1991. IIMA Working Paper No.1004.

Review of Post-Graduate Research In Agriculture (1973-1984):Are We Building Appropriate Skills For Tomorrow ? IIM,Ahmedabad. W.P. no-843. 1990, P 13., Paper contributed to International  Symposium  on  Sustainable agriculture  for  Natural  Resource  Management,  Indian Society of Agronomy, New Delhi, Feb 1990, as a part of CMA sponsored  workshop on Farmers; experimentation, risk adjustment and  traditional wisdom, Feb 9, 1990.

With  Karma  Ura ) Blending Cultural Values, Indigenous  Technology  and  Environment: The  Experience of Bhutan. IIM, Ahmedabad W.P. no-883. 1990, P 42. Presented at International   Conference   on   Sustainable  Development   of   Mountain    Regions,   ICIMOD, Sept.1990.

Farmers’ Innovations and Responsive Technologists: Building Sustainable Links,  Presented  at  International Symposium on Strategies For Sustainable  Mountain  Agriculture,  September 10-14, 1990, ICIMOD, Nepal.

(With Rakesh Singh ) Corporate Investment in Agriculture Research: Issues in Sustainable Development.  Paper presented in National Workshop on Agricultural Input Marketing,  held on 15 - 16 February 1990 at IIMA; IIMA W.P. 932.

Portfolio Approach to FSR and Extension: A Theoretical Departure, the paper  presented at  International Conference on Farming  System Research and Extension,  Michigan,  USA, October 14-17, 1990 and revised draft  for discussion at International Symposium on  Risk Minimization , ICAR, New Delhi, April 1991.

Knowledge  Networks for Peasant Innovation: Production and Reproduction  of  Knowledge,  paper  presented at an International conference on  Indigenous  knowledge  systems and Role of Extension, University of Hohenheim, Bad ball, Germany, May 20-25, 1991.

Locking  into  the  People’s  Knowledge System:  Reconceptualising  Role  of  Extension Science,   presented  at  conference  on knowledge  system  at  University  of  Hohenheim, Germany, 1991.

Why does poverty persist in regions of high biodiversity? : a case for indigenous property  right  system,  Paper  invited for the International  conference  on  Property  Rights  and Genetic Resources sponsored by IUCN, UNEP and ACTS at Kenya, June 10-16, 1991.

An  alternative approach to development and diffusion of technology for dry  regions,  : Why  will  the lessons of ‘green revolution’ and T & V system of World Bank  not  apply  ?, Paper presented at International conference of Society of Advancements in  Socio-Economics, Stockholm, June 16-19,1991.  IIMA Working Paper No.939.

(with  Kirit  K Patel and B.L.Patil)  Conserving Diversity  For  Sustainable  Development, The  Case  of  Plants  of Insecticidal and  Veterinary  Medicine  Importance.   Presented  at Project  Design Workshop on Genetic Resources for Sustainable Agriculture,  convened  by M.S.Swaminathan Research Foundation, Madras, November 22 - 23, 1991.  IIMA Working Paper No.1003.

Sustainability Through Biodiversity:  Designing Crucible of Culture, Creativity and  Conscience.   Presented  at International Conference on Biodiversity and Conservation  held  at Danish Parliament, Copenhagen, November 8, 1991.  IIMA Working Paper No.1005.

Biodiversity, Poverty and intellectual property rights of third world peasants: A case  for renegotiating  global  understanding,  The paper is an invited  contribution  for  the  Project Design  Workshop  on Genetic Resources For Sustainable Agriculture,   M  S  Swaminathan Research Foundation, Madras, Nov 22-23, 1991

Biotechnology  For  Livestock Improvement: some issues and perspectives,  Paper  presented  at National Workshop On Commercialization Of Biotechnologies For Agriculture  and Aquaculture, Indian Institute of Management,  Ahmedabad, April 23-24, 1992

Biotechnology  and  Intellectual Property Rights: Protecting the interests of  third  world farmers  and  scientists,  Paper presented at National  Workshop  On  Commercialization  Of Biotechnologies  For Agriculture and Aquaculture, Indian Institute of Management,   Ahmedabad, April 23-24, 1992

Developing  technologies  for sustainable resource management:  Eating your  cake  and having  it too !, Paper presented at an International Course on  Technology  Triangle-linking scientists,  extension workers and farmers- at Royal Agri. and Vety. Univ.,  Denmark,  April 6-10. 1992

Generating Sustainable Rural Development Options Around Wood based Biomass Energies: The case of ecological and political Knowledge Systems, Paper invited at International Conference  on  Woodbased  Biomass  energies, Forestry and  Rural  Development  at  Yale university, New Haven , Feb 1992

Dynamics  of  Internationally Aided Farming System Research Programme  :  Experience from India and Bangladesh, Paper presented at International Conference on Farming System Research, University of Michigan, October 14-17, 1990.

Sustainable Development of High Risk Environments: Synthesis of key findings,  Review Paper prepared for CMA workshop on the subject, March, 1992

Gupta Anil K.1983  Improverishment in Drought Prone Regions : A View from within (joint field study SDC/NABARD/IIM-A CMA, IIM Ahmedabad p.573.

Gupta Anil K. 1984  Small Farmer Household Economy in Semi-Arid Regions, CMA, IIM, Ahmedabad. Mimeo.

1985,	Socio-Ecological Paradigm to analyse the problem of poor in dry regions, Eco-Development News (Paris) 32, 71-75.

1981,  Viable Projects for Unviable Farmers - An Action Research Enquiry into the structure and Processes of Rural Poverty in Arid Regions. Paper presented in the Symposium on Rural Development in South Asia, IUAES Inter Congress, Amsterdam.

1987, Role of Women in Risk Adjustment in Drought Prone Regions with Special Reference to Credit Problems, October, IIM working paper No. 704. 

Matching Farmers’ Concerns with Technoligists’ Objectives in Dry Regions : An ExploratoryStudy of Scientific Goal Setting. CMA, IIM Ahmedabad mimeo P-103.

1988Survival Under Stress: Socio Ecological Perspective on Farmers’ Innovation and Risk Adjustment. Presented at International Congress on Plant Physiology, New Delhi  P.16 February.

Gupta Anil K andKarma Ura, 1990  Blending Cultural Values, Indigenous Technology and Environment : The experience of Bhutan. IIM, Ahmedabad, W.P. No.883 P-42, presented at International Conference on Integrated Mountain Development, ICIMOD, Kathmandu, September 10-14, 1990.                            

Honey Bee, 2(1), Ed. Gupta Anil K., Centre for Management in Agriculture, IIM< Ahmedabad, May 1991, 22.

Ray Raghunathmal,  Akal Kasht Nivarat, Shri Raghunath Ayurvedic Pharmacy, Maharashtra, 1942, 96.

Shree Ramaprasad , Aaloo Ki Khethi Shree  Dhularelal Ganga pustakmala Karyalay, Lucknow, 1948, 96.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

Upawasa G.K., Lessons from Traditional Sri Lankan Agriculture in Biological Methods of Pest Control.  Proceeding pp. 39-

Verma, M.R. 1967,   Dairy Husbandry of Nomadic Gujjars in six South-east Himachal Forest Ranges - A Study in pastoral animal husbandry M.Sc. Thesis, Hisar Punjab Agricultural University.

Verma M.R. and Y P Singh, 1969, A Plea for studies in Traditional Animal Husbanadary, Allahabad farmer, 

Warren D.M. 1986  Linking Scientific and Indigenous Agricultural Systems in the Transformation of International Agricultural Research and Development: Some US Perspectives, J. Lin Compton ed. Boulder, Westview Press.