282 Communities and Social Capital
nearby villages, distant close relatives deliberately also facilitate household technol-
ogy learning and innovation. The role of these close relatives for household inno-
vation is shown by the case of the wide-furrow plough (Da Long Gou)
This is a new sowing technology introduced by the government in the early
1990s for the purpose of increasing grain production in mountainous areas. Com-
pared with local traditional sowing methods, the plough can increase grain pro-
ductivity per unit of land, but requires specific conditions, including good quality
land (on terraces, plains or gently sloping land), access to labour and draft animals,
and intensive use of external inputs (fertilizers and plastic sheets). Although the
government has employed many measures, including administrative intervention
and financial subsidies (low-interest loans) to encourage adoption, we found that
by 1997 only 62 per cent of households had adopted the new technology, and that
the adoption rate in the low mountain villages was higher (73 per cent) than in the
high mountains (57 per cent). The difference in adoption rate can be explained by
several factors, particularly access to the innovation because of the typically limited
provision of demonstration plots and extension staff in the mountainous villages.
HCNs appear to have played a positive role in technology adoption, as evidenced
by the following statement from a housewife in a remote village: ‘The wide furrow
programme has interested this village for many years, but we were uncertain of the
technical details and cost–benefits until a relative of mine from a low mountain
area came to my plots to put on a demonstration last year. Seeing the good results,
all the residents in the village have adopted it this spring.’ Farmers do not like to
adopt new technologies without the opportunity to subject it to close and personal
scrutiny, and so the views of close relatives were critical in encouraging her family
and neighbours to adopt.
Compared with traditional kinship and relatives, neighbourhood mutual aid
and cooperation appear more important for household technology learning and
adoption. One of the important factors driving villagers’ interactions is that most
households suffer from labour shortages in the busy farming seasons (e.g. at sowing).
On average, each household had 2.4 workers and 60mu (4ha) farmland, so it is not
easy for them to complete sowing alone in a short period (typically 1–2 weeks, and
possibly less given that frequent spring droughts often reduce the window of
opportunity to only a few days). To overcome these problems, a common strategy
is for several households to exchange labour for collaborative sowing. However,
not all households in a village are prepared to exchange their labour (or farm tools)
with others. While many households benefit from neighbourly mutual aid, others
can find it difficult to complete sowing without their relatives’ help.
According to the survey, only 20 per cent of households had sowing machinery
whilst 25 per cent either did not have draught cattle or experienced a cattle short-
age. Neighbourly mutual aid was thus an important precondition for adopting
the new level plough, first extended in Zhidan in the 1980s to replace traditional
methods. One of the common strategies popularized in the Loess Plateau is that
several neighbours cooperate to complete sowing based upon the principle of
‘equal exchange’ of labour or between labour and cattle or seeding machines.