ABSTRACT
This chapter reflects on current agronomic controversies in India by exploring debates around two agroecological innovations – the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) and Non-Pesticidal Management (NPM). We present these innovations as sites of contestation and focus on the practices and contributions of a group that we refer to as ‘dissenting agronomists’ (Shambu Prasad 2009a, 2009b, 2011; Quartz 2010). Specifically, we reflect on our own experiences as agricultural scientists who have been active in research on and promotion of these innovations. We argue that important insights into the contribution of agronomic research to sustainability and development objectives can emerge from the study of dissenting agronomists. Of particular interest is their position at the boundaries of the discipline, which means frequent work and collaboration with farmers, civil society organisations, natural and social scientists, and networks outside formal research organisations. Further, we argue that the study of agricultural science ‘at the margins’, and the dissent that is integral to it, can add significant new insights to our understanding of dynamics of contestation within agronomy.
