Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp5 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Social network dynamics of direct seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.) farmers

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.13791
Submitted
13 March 2026
Published
13-08-2026

Abstract

Direct seeded rice (DSR) is a time, cost and resource-efficient alternative to conventional rice transplanting, but farmers face challenges in its adoption. This study aims to analyse farmers' social networks to understand how they access information on DSR practices and identify key influencers to promote wider adoption. The study was conducted during 2021 and 2023 using a three-stage sampling process to interview 240 technology-adopter farmers from Bhagalpur and West Champaran districts of Bihar, India to analyse the social networks of farmers practicing DSR. The study revealed that formal communication sources (government agencies and extension agents) were the most important sources of information, followed by the progressive farmers, farmer friends and input dealers for key informational support regarding DSR technology. These various sources can be utilised as channels for disseminating information about agricultural innovations, including DSR. The results of this study will aid public and private organisations in promoting new ideas among farmers through these established social networks.

References

  1. 1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rice market monitor: Global production and consumption trends 2024–25. Rome: FAO; 2025.
  2. 2. Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare. Annual report 2025–26: Production statistics and agricultural outlook. New Delhi: Government of India; 2026.
  3. 3. Mishra AK, Kumar S, Singh R. Sustainable rice intensification in Bihar: Overcoming the pitfalls of traditional puddling. Indian J Agric Sci. 2025;95(2):142–50.
  4. 4. Ashraf U, Mo Z, Tang X. Direct-seeded versus transplanted rice in Asia: Climatic effects, relative performance, and constraints—a comparative outlook. In: Agronomic Rice Practices and Postharvest Processing. Apple Academic Press; 2018. p. 51–100. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429488580-11
  5. 5. Kumar J, Dave AK, Nirala H, Naik RK. Productivity, economics and resource conservation perspectives of direct seeded rice method of establishment: Evidence from Chhattisgarh. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2021;10(1S):39–44.
  6. 6. Pathak H, Tewari AN, Sankhyan S, Dubey DS, Mina U, Singh VK, et al. Direct-seeded rice: Potential, performance and problems—a review. Curr Adv Agric Sci. 2011;3(2):77–88.
  7. 7. Rogers DMA. Knowledge innovation system: The common language. J Technol Stud. 2003;19:2–8.
  8. 8. Coley TG, Christopher U. Social learning through networks: The adoption of new agricultural technologies in Ghana. Am J Agric Econ. 2021;83:668–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/0002-9092.00188
  9. 9. Marin A, Wellman B. Social network analysis: An introduction. Sage Publications; 2011. p. 11–25. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446294413.n2
  10. 10. Matuschke I. Evaluating the impact of social networks in rural innovation systems: An overview. Washington (DC): International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); 2012. IFPRI Discussion Paper.
  11. 11. Issac ME, Erickson BH, Quashie-Sam SJ, Timmer VR. Transfer of knowledge on agroforestry management practices: The structure of farmer advice network. Ecol Soc. 2007;12:32. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02196-120232
  12. 12. Brown B, Samaddar A, Datt KS, Leipzig A, Kumar A, Singh DK, et al. Understanding decision processes in becoming a fee-for-hire service provider: A case study on direct seeded rice in Bihar, India. J Rural Stud. 2021;87:254–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.09.025
  13. 13. Borgatti SP, Mehra A, Brass DJ, Labianca G. Network analysis in the social sciences. Science. 2009;323(5916):892–5. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165821
  14. 14. Hoang LA, Castella JC, Novosad P. Social networks and information access: Implications for agricultural extension in a rice farming community in northern Vietnam. Agric Human Values. 2006;23(4):513–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-006-9013-5
  15. 15. Matuschke I, Qaim M. The impact of social networks on hybrid seed adoption in India. Agric Econ. 2009;40(5):493–505. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2009.00393.x
  16. 16. Goswami R, Basu D. Influence of information networks on farmer's decision-making in West Bengal. Indian Res J Ext Educ. 2011;11(2):50–6.
  17. 17. Thuo MW. Social network effects on groundnut farming: The case of Kenya and Uganda [dissertation]. University of Connecticut; 2012.
  18. 18. Adolwa IS, Okoth PF, Mulwa RM, Esilaba AO, Mairura FS, Nambiro E. Analysis of communication and dissemination channels influencing the adoption of integrated soil fertility management in western Kenya. J Agric Educ Ext. 2012;18(1):71–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2012.638782
  19. 19. Dutta R. Information needs and information-seeking behavior in developing countries: A review of the research. Int Inf Libr Rev. 2009;41(1):44–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2009.10762796
  20. 20. Spielman DJ, Davis K, Negash M, Ayele G. Rural innovation systems and networks: Findings from a study of Ethiopian smallholders. Agric Human Values. 2011;28:195–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-010-9273-y
  21. 21. Batagelj V, Mrvar A. Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. Cambridge University Press; 2011.
  22. 22. Gava O, Favilli E, Bartolini F, Brunori G. Knowledge networks and their role in shaping the relations within the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System in the agroenergy sector: The case of biogas in Tuscany (Italy). J Rural Stud. 2017;56:100–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.09.009
  23. 23. Behrend FD, Erwee R. Mapping knowledge flows in virtual teams with SNA. J Knowl Manag. 2009;13(4):99–114. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270910971860
  24. 24. Yadav S, Kumar V, Singh S, Kumar RM, Sharma S, Tripathi R, et al.Growing rice in eastern India: New paradigms of risk reduction and improving productivity. In: The Future Rice Strategy for India. Academic Press; 2017. p. 221–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-805374-4.00008-7
  25. 25. Gonsalves JF. A new relevance and better prospects for wider uptake of social learning within CGIAR. CCAFS Working Paper; 2013.
  26. 26. Haldar S, Misra S, Pal S, Basu D, Goswami R. Understanding agricultural information networks in West Bengal, India. Indian Res J Ext Educ. 2016;16(1):25–34.
  27. 27. Surabhi M, Subash SP, Anurag AK. Understanding the knowledge and social networks in India: Case study of Bihar. In: Proceedings of the 2015 Conference of the International Association of Agricultural Economists; 2015; Milan, Italy. p. 1–34.
  28. 28. Cobb NK, Graham AL, Abrams DB. Social network structure of a large online community for smoking cessation. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(7):1282–9. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.165449
  29. 29. Sulaiman RV, Hall A. Beyond technology dissemination: A knowledge system perspective on agricultural extension. Outlook Agric. 2002;31(4):225–33. https://doi.org/10.5367/000000002101294119
  30. 30. Raman KR, Singh L, Reddy MN. Social networks and technology adoption in Indian agriculture. J Rural Stud. 2018;60:30–40.
  31. 31. Glendenning CJ, Babu SC, Asenso-Okyere K. Review of agricultural extension in India. Washington (DC): International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); 2010. Discussion Paper No. 1041.
  32. 32. Jat ML, Gupta R, Sidhu HS, Kamboj BR, Gupta N. Conservation agriculture for sustainable intensification in South Asia. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 2017;252:3–14.
  33. 33. Andrews C, Dutta A, Hazra K. Knowledge networks in agricultural innovation: The role of input dealers and farmer intermediaries. Agric Syst. 2016;149:55–65.
  34. 34. McGuire S, Sperling L. Seed systems smallholder farmers use. Food Secur. 2016;8(1):179–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-015-0528-8

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.