Right data, wrong data: Statistical sampling and the making of modern agriculture in India.

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Social Studies of Science Pub Date : 2025-01-06 DOI:10.1177/03063127241307947
Madhumita Saha
{"title":"Right data, wrong data: Statistical sampling and the making of modern agriculture in India.","authors":"Madhumita Saha","doi":"10.1177/03063127241307947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The size of India's food deficit became a pressing question for the Indian state in the early years of independence. As different organizations, government bodies, and individuals debated over the ways, means, and expertise needed to tide over the food crisis, policymakers realized that the primary requirement was to have a numerical understanding of the problem. Data became crucial to accurately assess production trends and compare them with requirements. This article looks into the use of statistical methods, particularly, random sampling and production estimation through a crop-cutting technique. Exploring the statistical survey work done by P.C. Mahalanobis in Bengal from the late years of colonial rule to the surveys conducted by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research under the supervision of P.V. Sukhatme and V.G. Panse, the article analyzes how different factors, such as varying revenue systems of different regions and administrative structures, power struggles amongst statisticians, and leverage gained by Indian statisticians from support they received from better known British counterparts, all played a role in determining the nature of statistical tools adopted in India to measure its food production. Inaccurate data continued to be a challenge for the Indian state until well into the late 1950s, and that can now be explained in terms of this discord between Mahalanobis-led Kolkata-ISI and the ICAR of Sukhatme's time. India continued to follow different methods of statistical survey of foodcrops, thus, the scientific/political establishment always struggled with the apprehension that they did not have the 'right' data to come up with the correct assessment of the scene.</p>","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":" ","pages":"3063127241307947"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127241307947","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The size of India's food deficit became a pressing question for the Indian state in the early years of independence. As different organizations, government bodies, and individuals debated over the ways, means, and expertise needed to tide over the food crisis, policymakers realized that the primary requirement was to have a numerical understanding of the problem. Data became crucial to accurately assess production trends and compare them with requirements. This article looks into the use of statistical methods, particularly, random sampling and production estimation through a crop-cutting technique. Exploring the statistical survey work done by P.C. Mahalanobis in Bengal from the late years of colonial rule to the surveys conducted by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research under the supervision of P.V. Sukhatme and V.G. Panse, the article analyzes how different factors, such as varying revenue systems of different regions and administrative structures, power struggles amongst statisticians, and leverage gained by Indian statisticians from support they received from better known British counterparts, all played a role in determining the nature of statistical tools adopted in India to measure its food production. Inaccurate data continued to be a challenge for the Indian state until well into the late 1950s, and that can now be explained in terms of this discord between Mahalanobis-led Kolkata-ISI and the ICAR of Sukhatme's time. India continued to follow different methods of statistical survey of foodcrops, thus, the scientific/political establishment always struggled with the apprehension that they did not have the 'right' data to come up with the correct assessment of the scene.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
正确的数据,错误的数据:统计抽样和印度现代农业的形成。
在印度独立的最初几年,粮食短缺的规模成为印度政府面临的一个紧迫问题。当不同的组织、政府机构和个人就渡过粮食危机所需的方式、手段和专业知识进行辩论时,政策制定者意识到,首要要求是对问题有一个数字上的理解。数据对于准确评估生产趋势并将其与需求进行比较至关重要。本文探讨了统计方法的应用,特别是随机抽样和通过作物切割技术进行产量估计。本文探讨了P.C. Mahalanobis从殖民统治末期到印度农业研究委员会在P.V. Sukhatme和V.G. Panse的监督下所做的统计调查工作,分析了不同地区和行政结构的不同收入制度、统计学家之间的权力斗争等不同因素如何影响统计研究的发展。以及印度统计学家从更知名的英国同行那里获得的支持所获得的杠杆作用,都在决定印度采用统计工具来衡量其粮食生产的性质方面发挥了作用。直到20世纪50年代末,不准确的数据一直是印度政府面临的一个挑战,现在可以用mahalanobis领导的加尔各答isi和苏哈特梅时代的ICAR之间的分歧来解释。印度继续采用不同的粮食作物统计调查方法,因此,科学/政治机构总是担心他们没有“正确”的数据来对现场进行正确的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Virtual diversity and the value-ladenness of science Silence of the labs. The commercial roots of the genomic commons From the bench to public policy: Enhancing public trust in science. Making expert advice public in a time of emergency: Independent SAGE and the contestation of science during the Covid pandemic in the UK.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1