Upload
s
View
212
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ENDOGENOUS SOCIAL FACTORS AND DIMENSIONS OF TECHNOLOGY DIFFUSION IN A DEVELOPING COUNTRY - AN INDIAN EXPERIENCE
s. suresh
Plaming 6 Policy Research, Regional
Trivandrum 695 019. India.
Abstract Technology change involves technical
and non-technical parameters. A conducive
synergic climate involving a l l the dimensions
i s essential for successful technology transfer.
This i s particularly true in the case of
developing societies as the informational,
organizational and social environment i s not
sophisticated emugh as required for successful
technology. The author examines a particular
case, that of the Green revolution, as an
experiment that has succeeded in terms of the
various dimensions mentioned above,
assimilating the endogenous factors intrinsic to
globalization of the S T process.
I. INTROWCTION
Peasants in India had always resisted
change. This has tended them not to undertake
new innovations in agricultural or farming sector.
This aspect had to be reckoned w i t h in
formulating new agricultural policies for the
promotion of innovation and technology diffusion.
A t the same time there was also considerable
socio-political
introduce new
product i v i t ies , food shortages
pressure on the Government to
techniques to improve the farm
consequent to the farming and
in the early 1960s. The only
130
Research Laboratory,
alternative was to re ly on modern technology to improve the land productivity since no more land ,wid be immediately brought under plow.
The technical components of the new paradigm involved High Yielding Varieties (HYVs) of seeds, mechanical farming, inputs in the farm of improved fert i l izers and insecticides etc. The social dimension consisted of how the farmers who are generally ignorant of new techniques and their implications and , hence suspicious of them and therefore resist change, were made to abandon their old practices in favour of new methods of agriculture as wanted by the technological paradigm.
This socio-technical innovation and diffusion process involved not only the Government of India and the farmers, but also Research Institutions (ICAR) and Universities. There was considerable support from international agencies l i k e Ford Fcundation, USAID. The role of USAID was prominent in setting up agriarltual universities in India. International research institutions l i k e I R R I also had a significant collaborative role.
This largely dispels the prevalent dogmas concerning international linkages and collaborative programmes that they are only to serve the vested interests of the donor agencies or their international counterparts and not s t r ic t ly geared to the developing world's concerns. But in the case of the Green revolution in India, the success of the project meant so much to the Indian economy and the contribution from the international agencies was cr i t ical to i t s success without having any 'strings' attached, apparently.
11. BACKGROUND
The whole genesis owed to the signing of the f i r s t USAID-University contract in 1952. The multilateral donor agencies thus began to contribute to the development of a high-quality graduate school at the IARI, New Delhi. However, th is only constituted the f i r s t step in developing a new and indigenous national
agricultural research system and thorough reorganisation of the agricultural institution and Commodity Boards established by the colonial administration followed by the overhaul of and reforms i n the agricultural bdreaucracy( by inducting in an eminent agricultural scientist at the top in ICAR, which position was until then held by a c i v i l servant). A Committee of Scientists soon went into the task of recommending measures to reorganize the scientific research infrastructure.
I As a result the research institutes,
which were earlier independent bodies, and the commodity boards were brcught under ICAR. An Agricultural Research Service to improve the career paths of, and professionalism in, agricultural scientists was also introduced.
Most of the above were brought about under the influence of the multflateral agencies and most fmportantly the joint INDO-US Agricultural Research Review Team. The American system of federally supported agricultural research was very appealing. The Review Team had recommended sweeping changes in the largely civilian-dominated bureaucratic set-up. But changes were not forthcoming due to pressures from the powerful c i v i l , service t i l l C. Subramaniam took over as India's Agriculture Minister in 1964. Thus the international: agencies has, so to say initiated and supported the task of giving power and credibi l i ty to the agricultural scientists. The establishment of agricultural universities l i ke Govind Ballabh Pent University of Agriculturae and Technology at Pant Nagar, U.P. were patterned or^ the land-grant universities. of US., ( l i ke the Universities of I l l inois, Kamag, I Ohio, etc.) Some of these '3niversifies entered into partnership arrangements w i t h the Government of India to establish several other agricultural universities w i t h contract funds coming from the multilateral agencies. This t ru ly brought in a large amqnt of dynamism into the system by an exchange of scientists for training and subsequent f ie ld effort. The revamping of the administrative set-up was str ict ly speaking a corollary to thig,', in order to facilitate the technology transfer.
111. ANALYSIS
The, above two aspects depict the infoware (informationh.1)and organoware (organisational) dimenqion of the diffusion process. The climate of informational upgradation that ' take place through the interaction w i t h advanced centres in the area provided the stimulus for the organisational Iransformation. The endogepus socio-political structures were ~ acting essentially as hindrances until the technoware (technical) and humanware (social) interactions were synergistically stimulated by the preconditions
/
provided through appropriate infoware and organoware.
The peasants were provided w i t h the HYVs seeds and taught the new agricultural methods. The mass media were widely used to propagate the advantages of the new system. S t i l l the agricultural f ie ld extension workers reported i n the early 60s that convincing the farmers to switch to the technology was proving very costly and time-consuming.
th Model farms were started and miracle
seeds were imported from Mexico. The effort was entrusted to the extension officers and agricultural scientists and by 1970, they could damonstate that the model farms were a success through doubling of the yield. Continual effort to modify the seeds to accommodate consumer preferences, social and climatic variabi l i t ies followed suit. This feedback process enhanced the effctiveness of the transfer and diffusion process.
The social interactid? of a committed set of scientists backed by polity, conviction and funds, w i t h the peasant population i s the major socio-technical paradigm that emerged as the end game. The endogenous social factors that held back progress and change were slowly overcome to restructure the scenario, so that diffusion became faster. In fact the project would have failed in the latter stages but for this micro-level interactive process involving the agents of technical change (scientists) and the agents of social change (peasant leaders). I t is not usual that the el i te accommodate the plebian views and act on the feedback, for incorporation in the technical paradigm. The soclo-technical synergic paradign has evolved from much hierarchic and analytic interactions to forge a synthetic platform for technology diffusfoh. This contrasts with the usual situation in the LDCs. Even well-proven methods of science and technology f a i l due to resistance to ~movation-based change offered by the social factors.
The model farms representing the techno-political in i t iat ive and the scientist- peasant interaction depicting the socio-technical Forums coalesce into the new paradigm for techno-economic change. Of -course, the need- based and needinduced problem-solving nature of the whole process camot be neglected.
Demonstration plants acted as an intermediary between innovation and diffusion. and proved to be an instrument of chdnge, since there was an ambience of information feedback and need-induced circumstances. Moreover the globalization dimension acted as a powerful stimulant particularly in nucleating the informational and organizational climate for inducing change. The learning process was
13 1
mediated by the socio-cultural backgrowd of the participants, which was positive on ;account of the synergic combination of international support, technical inputs, administrative modernization and interactive management. This also reflect the dimensions that brought about appropriate infoware, orgmoware, technoware and humanware in the transfer and diffusion process.
I V . CONCL~ION
Thus, the knowledge system though originally developed abroad was adapted to the Indian situation and delivered though socio-technical forums in a manner responsive to the endogenws vectors, in a t r i a l and error but goal-oriented manner.
Hemce, the Technology Transfer and Diffusion process requires; (a) need-induced environment, (b) nucleation of the appropriate m-technical and socially relevant dimensions (c) sufficient technical impulse, (d) hierarchy of interaction among the aspects of change, and (e) policy changes at the micro and macro levels in a goal-oriented manner, for i t s penultimate success. The whole process shwld be discontinuous in nature, and the S&T policies in LDCs have a role in a facilitating this.
132