| A model to understand successful diffusion | |
|
We observed that a variety of actors have stakes in the issue of conservation tillage. We have seen their arguments for or against it. But regardless of who they are and what they think, we need to wonder how they can interact to achieve a large diffusion of no-till. We thus tried to modelize the pattern that is observed in cases of successful, widespread adoption, as well as in cases of failures. This is the point of this diagram. Overall, the striking feature of our controversy is the necessary existence of what we called a Consortium, a meta-association gathering all other kinds of actors, for conservation tillage to prevail. In many countries, CT is pushed by only some actors. In France, it’s mostly farmers that promote it by spreading the word and growing “comparison fields” for their peers to witness the benefits of no-till. In Norway, the government tried to popularize no-till to fight erosion but farmers didn’t support the initiative. In Kazakhstan, foreign scientists and agribusiness companies introduced it, but once again with little local support. In all these cases, it is the lack of coordination between the different actors that prevented a large development. On the contrary, in places like Argentina, Brazil, the United States or the Indo Gangetic Plains, Consortiums have emerged and played a significant role in CT adoption. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| Follow the worm ! | |
