“Blue Revolution”: The Adoption and Abandonment of Two Fisheries Technologies in Ningde, Fujian, 1953-1961

Abstract

The thesis examines two fisheries technologies—the qiaogu method (敲罟法) and kelp raft cultivation (海带筏式养殖)— that were pervasively adopted and then quickly abandoned during the collectivization era in socialist China. Through a focus on the transfer, adoption, and subsequent abandonment of these technologies, as well as their ecological and social impacts, this thesis presents three arguments. First, a key problem that the state identified during the collectivization campaign was how to scale up production and organize rural populations into collectives. Therefore, agricultural technological change in socialist China was driven by the state’s dual goal of simultaneously maximizing production and revolutionizing rural society. As a result, the state—intentionally or unintentionally—selected technologies that favored collective work, which reinforced collectivization campaigns by involving many people working together. Second, the state was not a monolith, and state-led schemes were incoherent to a certain extent. Since different levels of government might have different goals, they perceived certain technologies differently, thereby complicating state-led technology transfer programs. Some of the frontline officials ignored state requests, while others incorporated their own needs into the programs. The role the frontline officials play in the politics of technology deserves attention since the common person rarely encounters the state on a daily basis. Instead, they encounter the agents of the state, frontline officials, who implement the planners' visions on a day-to-day basis. Thirdly, although the state held ultimate power over the adoption of certain technologies, rural populations (including fishers) were not passive recipients—materially or ideologically. Some may change or even refuse technologies introduced by the state, while others may insist on using technologies banned by the state. In doing so, they partially rejected the ideological information that the state intended to convey to them through the use of those technologies, even though they often did so for their own survival