Ecological Literacy - Agri-culture: Reconnecting People, Land and Nature - page 150

about entomology in rice fields; water-user groups develop new under-
standings of the joint management of irrigation water for whole commun-
ities; and farmers' experimenting groups in Australia, Europe and North
America develop new ways in which to farm, using few fossil-fuel derived
inputs. This knowledge soon becomes bound up in new rituals and
traditions, which then confer a greater sense of value and permanence. It
would be wrong, therefore, to think of me - tis as traditional knowledge because
this mistakenly gives the impression that such intimate local knowledge
is unchanging, rigid and unable to adapt. Instead, it is the process of
knowing, and it is central to the idea of ecological literacy.
The idea of the world being full of diverse, parochial conditions, with
each place needing a differentiated approach, does not fit well with the
standardizing approach of industrial development. Modernism is efficient
because it aims for simplification. The central assumption is that techno-
logical solutions are universal, and therefore are independent of social
context. Ironically, this is also what makes it appealing - mass production
for us all. In some sectors, it works. Does it matter if the only restaurant
we can visit is the same as those in thousands of other cities around the
world? Yes it does, though we can always choose not to go. But does it
matter if the technology to produce our food is standardized, and
therefore requires coercion in order to encourage adoption by farmers.
Clearly, it does - it matters for farmers because their choices diminish and
their risks increase.
When farmers' conditions happen to be similar to those where techno-
logies are developed and tested, then the technology is likely to spread.
But most farmers experience differing conditions, values and constraints.
When they reject a technology - for example, because it does not fit their
needs or is too risky - modern agriculture can have no other response but
to assume it is the farmers' fault. Rarely do scientists, policy-makers and
extensionists question the technologies and the contexts that have generated
them. Instead, they blame the farmers, wondering why they should resist
technologies with such 'obvious' benefits. It is they who are labelled as
'backward' or 'laggards'. The problem, as architect Kisho Kurukawa
indicates, is that 'Technology does not take root when it is cut off from culture and
tradition. The transfer of technology requires sophistication: adaptation to region, to unique
situations and to custom.' 4
Modernist thinking inevitably leads to a kind of arrogance about the
social and natural world. It allows us to make grand plans without the
distraction of consulting with other people. It allows us to cut through
the messy and complex realities of local circumstance. Such modernity
seeks to sweep away the confusion of diverse local practices and pluralistic
functions, accumulated over the ages, in order to establish a new order.