Measuring Social Networks' Effects on Agricultural Technology Adoption
Open accessAbstract
We present and discuss the various existing methods to measure social networks in a quantitative manner. We cover popular approaches, such as, snowball sampling, networks within sample, network within census, peer reporting, and new approaches, such as, sample within sample and illustrate some of the methods using detailed network data from three villages in Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra (India).
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Information networks play a key role in the adoption of technologies and innovative practices, and in addressing environmental change in agricultural systems.
“Information networks play a key role in the adoption of technologies and innovative practices, and in addressing environmental change in agricultural systems (Chaudhury et al. 2017;Isaac 2012;Maertens and Barrett 2013).”
From Scenarios for an agroecological transition of smallholder family farmers: a case study in Guadeloupe (2022) · cites this paper as Maertens and Barrett 2013
The introduction and Discussion (page unavailable in our copy) describe social networks as important to farmers’ learning about new technologies and the diffusion of agricultural innovations. They do not say that information networks help agricultural systems address environmental change; the Discussion mentions climate data only as a possible aid to future research. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Granovetter, M. S. (1973) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/225469 · Cited by 40,491 · see citing works
Stanton, B. F., & Rogers, E. M. (1963) · Journal of Farm Economics · doi:10.2307/1235767 · Cited by 6,725 · see citing works
Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem
Manski, C. F. (1993) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2298123 · Cited by 6,209 · see citing works
Jackson, M. O. (2010) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctvcm4gh1 · Cited by 3,579 · see citing works
Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey
Feder, G., Just, R. E., & Zilberman, D. (1985) · Economic Development and Cultural Change · doi:10.1086/451461 · Cited by 3,482 · see citing works
Jackson, M. O. (2008) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781400833993 · Cited by 2,746 · see citing works
Learning about a New Technology: Pineapple in Ghana
Conley, T. G., & Udry, C. R. (2010) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.100.1.35 · Cited by 2,180 · see citing works
Learning by doing and learning from others: Human capital and technical change in agriculture
Foster, A. D., & Rosenzweig, M. R. (1995) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/601447 · Cited by 2,038 · see citing works
Social Networks and Technology Adoption in Northern Mozambique
Bandiera, O., & Imran Rasul, A. (2006) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0297.2006.01115.x · Cited by 1,366 · see citing works
Microeconomics of technology adoption
Foster, A. D., & Rosenzweig, M. R. (2010) · Annual Review of Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev.economics.102308.124433 · Cited by 1,055 · see citing works
Social learning in a heterogeneous population: technology diffusion in the Indian green revolution
Munshi, K. (2004) · Journal of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2003.03.003 · Cited by 798 · see citing works
Selection and Comparative Advantage in Technology Adoption
Suri, T. (2011) · Econometrica · doi:10.3982/ecta7749 · Cited by 693 · see citing works
Social Learning Through Networks: The Adoption of New Agricultural Technologies in Ghana
Conley, T. G., & Udry, C. (2001) · American Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/0002-9092.00188 · Cited by 478 · see citing works
van den Berg, G. (2001) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 393 · see citing works
Brock, W. A., & Durlauf, S. N. (2001) · Handbook of econometrics · doi:10.1016/s1573-4412(01)05007-3 · Cited by 385 · see citing works
Modeling Technology Adoption in Developing Countries
Besley, T., & Case., A. B. (1993) · American Economic Review · Cited by 375 · see citing works
The complex dynamics of smallholder technology adoption: the case of SRI in Madagascar
Moser, C. M., & Barrett, C. B. (2006) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1574-0862.2006.00169.x · Cited by 359 · see citing works
Self-citationSelection and Comparative Advantage in Technology Adoption
Suri, T. (2009) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w15346 · Cited by 316 · see citing works
The Power and Pitfalls of Experiments in Development Economics: Some Non‐random Reflections
Barrett, C. B., & Carter, M. R. (2010) · Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy · doi:10.1093/aepp/ppq023 · Cited by 310 · see citing works
Self-citationThe impact of social networks on hybrid seed adoption in India
Matuschke, I., & Qaim, M. (2009) · Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1574-0862.2009.00393.x · Cited by 214 · see citing works
The Importance of Learning in the Adoption of High‐Yielding Variety Seeds
Cameron, L. (1999) · American Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.2307/1244452 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Information Flows and Social Externalities in a Tanzanian Banana Growing Village
den Broeck, K. V., & Dercon, S. (2011) · The Journal of Development Studies · doi:10.1080/00220381003599360 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Useche, P., Barham, B. L., & Foltz, J. D. (2009) · American Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2008.01236.x · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Hogset, H., & Barrett, C. B. (2010) · Economic Development and Cultural Change · doi:10.1086/650424 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Self-citationIdentity, Interest and Information Search in a Dynamic Rural Economy
Santos, P., & Barrett, C. B. (2010) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.04.003 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Self-citationWhat Do We Learn About Social Networks When We Only Sample Individuals? Not MuchPreprint
Santos, P., & Barrett, C. B. (2008) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1141838 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- [3]3. Barrett, C.B., ed. 2005. The Social Economics of Poverty: on Identities, Groups, Commu- nities and Networks (London: Routledge).
- [4]4. Besley, T. and A. Case. 1993. "Modeling Tech- nology Adoption in Developing Coun- tries." American Economic Review 83: 396-402.
- [8]8. Chantarat, S. and C.B. Barrett. Forthcom- ing. "Social Network Capital, Economic Mobility and Poverty Traps," Journal of Economic Inequality.
- [13]13. Foster, A.D. and M.R. Rosenzweig. 2010. "Microeconomics of Technology Adop- tion."Annual Review of Economics 2:395- 424.
- [16]16. Jackson, M.O. 2008. Social and Economic Net- works (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univer- sity Press).
- [18]18. Manski, C. 1993. "Identification of Endoge- nous Social Effects: The Reflection Prob- lem" Review of Economic Studies 60: 531-42.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rai, V., & Robinson, S. A. (2015) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.04.014 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
Peer learning and technology adoption in a digital farmer-to-farmer network
Lasdun, V., Harou, A. P., Magomba, C., & Guereña, D. (2025) · Journal of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2025.103496 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Scenarios for an agroecological transition of smallholder family farmers: a case study in Guadeloupe
Andrieu, N., Blundo-Canto, G., Chia, E., Diman, J. L., Dugué, P., Fanchone, A., Howland, F., Ott, S., & Poulayer, C. (2022) · Agronomy for Sustainable Development · doi:10.1007/s13593-022-00828-x · Cited by 18 · see citing works
- Authors
- Maertens, A., & Barrett, C. B.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Cornell University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Maertens, Annemie
- Venue
- American Journal of Agricultural Economics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-05-14
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 353-359
- ISSN
- 0002-9092 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8276
- OpenAlex
- W2161560518
- Cited by
- 370
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 7
- FWCI
- 40.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- American Journal of Agricultural Economics (publishedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0649330)
- Agricultural and Applied Economics Association
- Cornell University
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agricultural Innovations and Practices
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agricultural Development and Management
- Keywords
- social networks, agricultural technology adoption, diffusion of innovations, peer effects
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
