Expecting More, Committing Less 9completed, the government and its contractors proceeded to replace
five antiquated canals in a farming region outside Kathmandu.
For the builders of the new canals, the project presented technical
challenges in topography, adequate grade for water flow, and materials
logistics. Preoccupied with execution, farmers were not asked about
their experiences dealing with landslides and local soil conditions.
After the canals were built, a water-users group was formed. The
local farmers who had managed the old canals for decades were
initially excluded. Local norms that had governed the old canals were
ignored. When the new canals were put into service, promises made at
the outset began to crumble: water deliveries were unreliable; only two
of the five villages were receiving adequate water supplies; and sec-
tions of the new canals were often blocked with mud. Instead of higher
yields, total yields declined, especially along the tail ends of the canals.
The project was envisioned to showcase how technology could
solve long-standing challenges. Earthen ditches bleed a lot of water,
and cement-lined canals eliminate such loss. But the emphasis on
technology obscured and ultimately undermined the community’s so-
cial norms. Individuals no longer needed to focus on shared interests—
and so they didn’t. The benefits of high-tech expertise and external
capital had looked good on paper but never proved themselves on the
ground.
In America, people relied on traditional social norms to produce food
for more than two and a half centuries. This was a time in America’s
history of more hunger, more-frequent crop failures, and less knowledge
of nature and the environment.
Appeals for the federal government to do more began before the
country declared its independence. In 1 , proposals for a federal de-
partment of agriculture already existed. If a case were to be made for
the federal government to do more, the birth of a new nation was the
ideal moment and opportunity.
Most elected officials had farming backgrounds. Agriculture domi-
nated the economy. Its importance to national employment and ex-
ports was unquestioned. Members of the “Agricultural Society” were
continually petitioning Congress for support. George Washington,