The role of culture in farmer learning and technology adoption: A case study of farmer field schools among rice farmers in central Luzon, Philippines Florencia G. Palis Crop and Environmental Sciences Division, International Rice Research Institute, Manila, Philippines Accepted in revised form June 20, 2005 Abstract. The goal of this paper is to show how culture – shared norms and values – is challenged and used to facilitate cooperative behavior within the context of farmer field schools (FFS) in central Luzon, Philippines. The success of the FFS is primarily associated with cultural norms that encourage experiential and collective learning and eventually lead to the adoption of integrated pest management (IPM) methods among the farmers. The study was conducted in central Luzon, the rice granary region of the Philippines, from 1992 to 1995 and again in 1999. Both qualitative and quantitative research methods were employed. Results indicate that a keen understanding of Filipino culture and values is essential if FFS is to be successful and if farmers are to successfully learn and practice IPM. Key words: Collective learning, Culture, Experiential learning, Farmer field school, Integrated pest management, Philippines, Rice farmers, Technology adoption Abbreviations: FFS – Farmer field school; IPM – Integrated pest management; IRRI – International Rice Research Institute; SIR – Smooth interpersonal relations Florencia Palis has a PhD in anthropology and is working as a post-doctoral fellow at the Crop and Environmental Sciences Division (CESD) of the International Rice Research Institute in the Philippines. She is also an adjunct faculty member at the Department of Agricultural Systems of Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand. Introduction Technology adoption in agriculture has often been problematic. Although various agricultural technologies have been developed over the past half-century, many can be found only in scientific journals and are not being practiced by their target users – farmers. Integrated pest management (IPM) is an agricultural technology that has been promoted since the 1970s, but did not gain widespread adoption until the 1990s, when it was disseminated through the farmer field school (FFS). 1 IPM aims to reduce pesticide use while at the same time sustaining food production, protecting the environment, and ensuring the good health of farmers, their families, and consumers. It uses a host of techniques such as cultural practices, plant resistance, and biological and chemical control methods for the management of weeds, insects, rodents, and diseases, with pesticides used only as a last resort to prevent crop loss. Initially, IPM focused on insect pests, and the decision to spray was based on economic threshold level (ETL). ETL assumes that farmers are profit maximizers. Hence, the decision to spray is made when pest damage levels reach the point at which the value of an incremental reduction in yield is equal to the cost of preventing its occurrence (Headley, 1972; Palis et al., 1990). Due to the complexity of this approach, IPM did not gain widespread adoption. IPM however evolved in the 1990s, from an economic to an ecologically-based perspective and from having an insect pest focus to a farmer focus. In this new guise, it enhances farmers’ capacity to observe and make informed decisions. IPM initially gained success in Indonesia when it was disseminated through the farmer field school (FFS). This extension approach was later used as a model in the Philippines, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, and Nepal (Dilts and Hate, 1996; Matteson, 2000). In the case of the Philip- pines, the approach received overwhelming acceptance among farmers who had had a national crop protection policy for a long time (Navarro et al., 1998). FFS is essentially an informal educational approach to IPM extension that is experiential and participatory Agriculture and Human Values (2006) Ó Springer 2006 DOI 10.1007/s10460-006-9012-6