Soil mapping by farmers in a Thai-Lao village in Northeast Thailand: A test of an ethnopedological research method
Additional Files
Having farmers draw soil maps of their communities has been frequently advocated as a faster, cheaper alternative to scientific soil surveying in developing countries. However, research on the extent to which farmers share common mental soil maps and the extent to which these match scientific maps is lacking. In this study, 11 Thai-Lao farmers were individually asked to draw maps showing the location of different types of soil in their village, and two groups of four farmers each were assembled to draw soil maps collectively. The maps were very different from each other and the extent to which they matched scientific categorizations of village soils was low. The maps of the individual farmers depicted two to five types of soil occupying two to seven zones. The map of one group depicted two types of soil in two zones, while the map of the other group depicted four types of soil in seven zones. When the soil zones on the maps drawn by the individual farmers were compared with scientific categorization of the soils at 26 sampling points, agreement was low, with an average of 11.6 full and partial matches. The performance of the group maps was not necessarily better: One group map had no full matches and only five partial matches while the other group map had 19 full and partial matches. In view of this heterogeneity in the soil knowledge of community members, ways must be found to identify the most knowledgeable farmers to draw the maps if farmer soil mapping is to be a useful research tool. This study found that the maps drawn by individuals who have had worked as hired laborers on plots in many parts of their village were generally more reliable than those drawn by farmers who had only worked on their own plots.
Barrera-Bassols, N., Zinck, J. A., & Van Ranst, E. (2006a). Local soil classification and comparison of indigenous and technical soil maps in a Mesoamerican community using spatial analysis. Geoderma, 135, 140-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.geoderma.2005.11.010
Barrera-Bassols, N., Zinck, J. A., & Van Ranst, E. (2006b). Symbolism, knowledge and management of soil and land resources in indigenous communities: Ethnopedology at global, regional and local scales. Catena, 65(2), 118-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2005.11.001
Barrera‐Bassols, N., Zinck, J. A., & Van Ranst, E. (2009). Participatory soil survey: experience in working with a Mesoamerican indigenous community. Soil use and Management, 25(1), 43-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00192.x
Cools, N., De Pauw, E., & Deckers, J. (2003). Towards an integration of conventional land evaluation methods and farmers’ soil suitability assessment: a case study in northwestern Syria. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 95(1), 327-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(02)00045-2
Nethononda, L. O., & Odhiambo, J. J. O. (2011). Indigenous soil knowledge relevant to crop production of smallholder farmers at Rambuda irrigation scheme, Vhembe District South Africa. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(11), 2576-2581. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR10.1170
Ngwe, K., Kheoruenromne, I., & Suddhiprakarn, A. (2012). Comparative Potassium Chemistry in Paddy Soils of Different Development Status under Tropical Savanna Climate–A Thailand Situation. Thai Journal of Agricultural Science, 45(4), 181-195.
Payton, R. W., Barr, J. J. F., Martin, A., Sillitoe, P., Deckers, J. F., Gowing, J. W., ... & Zuberi, M. I. (2003). Contrasting approaches to integrating indigenous knowledge about soils and scientific soil survey in East Africa and Bangladesh. Geoderma, 111(3-4), 355-386. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(02)00272-0
Rigg, J. D. (1985). The role of the environment in limiting the adoption of new rice technology in Northeastern Thailand. Transactions of the institute of British Geographers, 10(4), 481-494. https://doi.org/10.2307/621893
Saleque, M. A., Uddin, M. K., Ferdous, A. K. M., & Rashid, M. H. (2007). Use of Farmers' Empirical Knowledge to Delineate Soil Fertility‐Management Zones and Improved Nutrient‐Management for Lowland Rice. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 39(1-2), 25-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620701758915
Schuler, U., Choocharoen, C., Elstner, P., Neef, A., Stahr, K., Zarei, M., & Herrmann, L. (2006). Soil mapping for land‐use planning in a karst area of N Thailand with due consideration of local knowledge. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 169(3), 444-452. https://doi.org/10.1002/jph.200521902
Trung, N. D., Verdoodt, A., Dusar, M., Van, T. T., & Van Ranst, E. (2008). Evaluating ethnopedological knowledge systems for classifying soil quality. A case study in Bo Hamlet with Muong people of Northern Vietnam. Geographical Research, 46(1), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-5871.2007.00489.x
WinklerPrins, A. M. (1999). Insights and applications local soil knowledge: a tool for sustainable land management. Society & Natural Resources, 12(2), 151-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/089419299279812
Yodda, S., & Rambo, A. T. (2018). Lack of consensus about indigenous soil knowledge among wet rice farmers in a Thai‐Lao village in N ortheast T hailand. Land Degradation & Development, 29(11), 4121-4128. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr. 3166
Yodda, S., Laohasiriwong, S., & Rambo, A. T. (2020). Naming, Classification, and management of paddy soils by Thai-Lao rice farmers in a village in Northeast Thailand. Geoderma, 369, 114332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma. 2020.114332
Copyright (c) 2022 Forest and Society
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open access journal which means that all contents is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.
Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, without the written consent of the Publisher. An article based on a section from a completed graduate dissertation may be published in Forest and Society, but only if this is allowed by author's(s') university rules. The Editors reserve the right to edit or otherwise alter all contributions, but authors will receive proofs for approval before publication.
Forest and Society operates a CC-BY 4.0 © license for journal papers. Copyright remains with the author, but Forest and Society is licensed to publish the paper, and the author agrees to make the article available with the CC-BY 4.0 license. Reproduction as another journal article in whole or in part would be plagiarism. Forest and Society reserves all rights except those granted in this copyright notice