IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/wdevel/v116y2019icp28-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expertise in rural development: A conceptual and empirical analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Lowe, Philip
  • Phillipson, Jeremy
  • Proctor, Amy
  • Gkartzios, Menelaos

Abstract

Understandings of socially distributed expertise as being key to living, interpreting and intervening in the world, are increasingly used in development narratives, referring usually to knowledge sharing across multi-stakeholder partnerships. This movement towards the democratisation of expertise challenges the ideological claim of science to be the exclusive source of objective information, evidence and discovery on which informed decisions and technological developments should be based. But if we reject that claim, what are the implications for the way stakeholders learn, organise and transmit knowledge and skills, and resolve problems? And how do science and expertise come together in development narratives and practices? We address these questions through an examination of the changing relationship between scientific, professional and non-professional expertise in rural development. Firstly, we examine the evolution of models of rural development and knowledge generation over past decades and introduce the concept of vernacular expertise – the expertise that people have and develop that is place-based but crucially nourished by outside sources and agents and which underpins neo-endogenous development models. Secondly, by drawing empirically on qualitative research with rural advisory professionals who support farmer decision making we unpack the composition of vernacular expertise as a fusion of field/place generated and field/place focused knowledge, and consider how it may be better recognised and enhanced in development processes and policy agendas.

Suggested Citation

  • Lowe, Philip & Phillipson, Jeremy & Proctor, Amy & Gkartzios, Menelaos, 2019. "Expertise in rural development: A conceptual and empirical analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 28-37.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:116:y:2019:i:c:p:28-37
    DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.12.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X18304339
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.12.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gupta, Anil K., 1999. "Science, Sustainability and Social Purpose: Barriers to Effective Articulation, Dialogue and Utilization of Formal and Informal Science in Public Policy," IIMA Working Papers WP1999-12-02, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    2. Helga Nowotny, 2003. "Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 151-156, June.
    3. R. J. Dancey, 1993. "The Evolution Of Agricultural Extension In England And Wales Presidential Address," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 375-393, September.
    4. John Briggs, 2005. "The use of indigenous knowledge in development: problems and challenges," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 5(2), pages 99-114, April.
    5. Philip Lowe & Jeremy Phillipson, 2006. "Reflexive Interdisciplinary Research: The Making of a Research Programme on the Rural Economy and Land Use," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(2), pages 165-184, July.
    6. Elizabeth Shove & Arie Rip, 2000. "Users and unicorns: a discussion of mythical beasts in interactive science," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 175-182, June.
    7. Judith Petts & Catherine Brooks, 2006. "Expert Conceptualisations of the Role of Lay Knowledge in Environmental Decisionmaking: challenges for Deliberative Democracy," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 38(6), pages 1045-1059, June.
    8. Sheila Jasanoff, 2003. "(No?) Accounting for expertise," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 157-162, June.
    9. Dove, Michael R. & Kammen, Daniel M., 2001. "Vernacular Models of Development: An Analysis of Indonesia Under the "New Order"," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 619-639, April.
    10. Sally Eden & Andrew Donaldson & Gordon Walker, 2006. "Green Groups and Grey Areas: Scientific Boundary-Work, Nongovernmental Organisations, and Environmental Knowledge," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 38(6), pages 1061-1076, June.
    11. Angela Liberatore & Silvio Funtowicz, 2003. "‘Democratising’ expertise, ‘expertising’ democracy: What does this mean, and why bother?," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 146-150, June.
    12. Amy Proctor & Andrew Donaldson & Jeremy Phillipson & Philip Lowe, 2012. "Field Expertise in Rural Land Management," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(7), pages 1696-1711, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Babatunde Adeyeye & Lanre Amodu & Oscar Odiboh & Kehinde Oyesomi & Evaristus Adesina & Darlynton Yartey, 2021. "Agricultural Radio Programmes in Indigenous Languages and Agricultural Productivity in North-Central Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Chen, Hsi-Chun & Knierim, Andrea, 2020. "Unravelling processes of social innovation in rural areas: a comparative case study based on actor-network perspective," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305593, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    3. Rita Vilkė & Živilė Gedminaitė‐Raudonė & Tomas Baležentis & Dalia Štreimikienė, 2021. "Farmers' awareness of eco‐efficiency and cleaner production as environmental responsibility: Lithuanian case," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 288-298, January.
    4. Mingming Li & Marko Milojevic & Dmitry Gura, 2024. "Development of methodology for evaluating sustainable rural development," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 21237-21257, August.
    5. Xudan Lin & Hong Zhu & Duo Yin, 2022. "Enhancing Rural Resilience in a Tea Town of China: Exploring Tea Farmers’ Knowledge Production for Tea Planting, Tea Processing and Tea Tasting," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    6. Ensor, Jonathan & de Bruin, Annemarieke, 2022. "The role of learning in farmer-led innovation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    7. Bram van Vulpen, 2020. "Rethinking The Regional Bounds Of Justice: A Scoping Review Of Spatial Justice In Eu Regions," Romanian Journal of Regional Science, Romanian Regional Science Association, vol. 14(2), pages 5-34, DECEMBER.
    8. Mulugeta Y. Birhanu & Tesfahun Alemayehu & Jasmine E. Bruno & Fasil Getachew Kebede & Emmanuel Babafunso Sonaiya & Ezekiel H. Goromela & Oladeji Bamidele & Tadelle Dessie, 2021. "Technical Efficiency of Traditional Village Chicken Production in Africa: Entry Points for Sustainable Transformation and Improved Livelihood," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-21, July.
    9. Felix Ouko Opola & Laurens Klerkx & Cees Leeuwis & Catherine Kilelu, 2021. "The Hybridity of Inclusive Innovation Narratives Between Theory and Practice: A Framing Analysis," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 33(3), pages 626-648, June.
    10. Katharine Legun & Karly Ann Burch & Laurens Klerkx, 2023. "Can a robot be an expert? The social meaning of skill and its expression through the prospect of autonomous AgTech," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(2), pages 501-517, June.
    11. Petr Klusáček & Klára Charvátová & Josef Navrátil & Tomáš Krejčí & Stanislav Martinát, 2021. "Regeneration of Post-Agricultural Brownfield for Social Care Needs in Rural Community: Is There Any Transferable Experience?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-18, December.
    12. Chen, Hsi-Chun & Knierim, Andrea, 2020. "Unravelling processes of social innovation in rural areas: a comparative case study based on actor-network perspective," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305593, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    13. María del Carmen Pérez-González & Lidia Valiente-Palma, 2021. "Cooperative Societies and Sustainability: A Spatial Analysis of Andalusia as a Tool for Implementing Territorial Development Policies, Strategies and Initiatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
    14. Marcos Carchano & Inmaculada Carrasco & Sebastián Castillo & M. Carmen García-Cortijo, 2021. "The Social Economy as a Factor of Economic Development and Resilience of Population in Rural Areas. A Study of Mediating Effects in Castilla-La Mancha (Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-19, May.
    15. Fieldsend, Andrew F. & Varga, Eszter & Biró, Szabolcs & Von Münchhausen, Susanne & Häring, Anna Maria, 2022. "Multi-actor co-innovation partnerships in agriculture, forestry and related sectors in Europe: Contrasting approaches to implementation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Markus Dressel, 2022. "Models of science and society: transcending the antagonism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Chiasson, Guy & Angelstam, Per & Axelsson, Robert & Doyon, Frederik, 2019. "Towards collaborative forest planning in Canadian and Swedish hinterlands: Different institutional trajectories?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 334-345.
    3. Gunn, Callum J. & Bertelsen, Neil & Regeer, Barbara J. & Schuitmaker-Warnaar, Tjerk Jan, 2021. "Valuing patient engagement: Reflexive learning in evidence generation practices for health technology assessment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    4. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    5. Martin J Wassen & Hens Runhaar & Aat Barendregt & Tomasz Okruszko, 2011. "Evaluating the Role of Participation in Modeling Studies for Environmental Planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 38(2), pages 338-358, April.
    6. Fábio Grigoletto & Fernanda Antunes de Oliveira & Caio Caradi Momesso & Ibrahim Kamel Rodrigues Nehemy & João Emílio de Almeida Junior & Vinícius de Avelar São Pedro & Roberto Greco & Mário Aquino Alv, 2023. "Technological Affordance and the Realities of Citizen Science Projects Developed in Challenging Territories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-15, April.
    7. Klenk, Nicole L. & Hickey, Gordon M., 2011. "A virtual and anonymous, deliberative and analytic participation process for planning and evaluation: The Concept Mapping Policy Delphi," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 152-165, January.
    8. Zeigermann, Ulrike & Böcher, Michael, 2020. "Challenges for bridging the gap between knowledge and governance in sustainability policy – The case of OECD ‘Focal Points’ for Policy Coherence for Development," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    9. Bob Frame, 2008. "‘Wicked’, ‘Messy’, and ‘Clumsy’: Long-Term Frameworks for Sustainability," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 26(6), pages 1113-1128, December.
    10. Cleland, Jonelle & Rogers, Abbie A., 2010. "Putting the Spotlight on Attribute Definition: a knowledge base approach," Research Reports 107578, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    11. Kragt, M.E. & Pannell, D.J. & McVittie, A. & Stott, A.W. & Vosough Ahmadi, B. & Wilson, P., 2016. "Improving interdisciplinary collaboration in bio-economic modelling for agricultural systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 217-224.
    12. Michaela Trippl & Tanja Sinozic & Helen Lawton Smith, 2015. "The Role of Universities in Regional Development: Conceptual Models and Policy Institutions in the UK, Sweden and Austria," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(9), pages 1722-1740, September.
    13. Michael Barnett, 2016. "Accountability and global governance: The view from paternalism," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(2), pages 134-148, June.
    14. Justus Henke, 2022. "Can Citizen Science in the Humanities and Social Sciences Deliver on the Sustainability Goals?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-20, July.
    15. Schneidewind, Uwe & Singer-Brodowski, Mandy & Augenstein, Karoline & Stelzer, Franziska, 2016. "Pledge for a transformative science: A conceptual framework," Wuppertal Papers 191, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy.
    16. Sedlačko Michal & Staroňová Katarína, 2015. "An Overview of Discourses on Knowledge in Policy: Thinking Knowledge, Policy and Conflict Together," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 9(2), pages 10-31, December.
    17. Camilla Adelle, 2019. "The Role of Knowledge in Food Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 214-223.
    18. Stefan Sjöström & Maritha Jacobsson & Anna Hollander, 2017. "Collegiality, Therapy and Mediation—The Contribution of Experts in Swedish Mental Health Law," Laws, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-17, January.
    19. Peter D. Gluckman & Anne Bardsley & Matthias Kaiser, 2021. "Brokerage at the science–policy interface: from conceptual framework to practical guidance," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    20. Andrea Saltelli & Mario Giampietro, 2015. "The fallacy of evidence based policy," Papers 1607.07398, arXiv.org.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:116:y:2019:i:c:p:28-37. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.