Effects of banded biochar application on dryland wheat production and fertiliser use in 4 experiments in Western Australia and South Australia suggest that biochar has the potential to reduce fertiliser requirement while crop productivity is maintained, and biochar additions can increase crop yields at lower rates of fertiliser use. Banding was used to minimise wind erosion risk and place biochar close to crop roots. The biochars/metallurgical chars used in this study were made at relatively high temperatures from woody materials, forming stable, low-nutrient chars. The results suggest that a low biochar application rate (~1 t/ha) by banding may provide significant positive effects on yield and fertiliser requirement. Benefits are likely to result from improved crop nutrient and water uptake and crop water supply from increased arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal colonisation during dry seasons and in low P soils, rather than through direct nutrient or water supply from biochars. Financial analysis using farm cash flow over 12 years suggests that a break-even total cost of initial biochar use can range from AU$40 to 190/ha if the benefits decline linearly to nil over 12 years, taking into account a P fertiliser saving of 50% or a yield increase of 10%, or both, assuming long-term soil fertility is not compromised. Accreditation of biochar for carbon trading may assist cost reduction.

This chapter talks about how to engage with co-produced research and participatory practices from a community perspective. It discusses how co-produced interdisciplinary research experiences and knowledge exchanges facilitate interaction with members of the community, with academics and with artists as a part of the Productive Margins project. The programme is seeking to remap the terrain of regulation, by involving the knowledge, passions, and creativity of citizens often considered on the margins of politics and policymaking. However, rather than examining the progress and outcomes of the research project itself, the chapter analyses the settings and process leading up to the establishment of the research project: the formation of the working group where they explored the theme of poverty; and the Research Forum where academics and community partners came together to share knowledge and interdisciplinary ways forward.

Introduction Clinical trials must include diverse participants to ensure the wide applicability of results. However, people from ethnic minorities are included in clinical trials at rates lower than expected given their share of the population. Working with South Riverside Community Development Centre (SRCDC), Talking Trials used public engagement to foster discussions around the underrepresentation of those from minority ethnic communities in clinical trials and to identify and address concerns surrounding trial participation. Methods We conducted three workshops with 13 co‐researchers from minority ethnic backgrounds. We explored perceptions and understanding of clinical trials alongside participatory art activities to help move away from verbocentric methods of communication. These artworks formed an exhibition that was presented to the community, prompting further discussions and engagement. Findings Co‐production workshops were an effective tool to introduce the public to trial research. With little knowledge of clinical trials at the beginning of the process, our co‐researchers formed a cohesive group, sharing initial fears and mistrust towards trials. As conversations progressed these attitudes clearly shifted. Artwork produced during the workshops was incorporated into an exhibition. Quotes and creative pieces from the group were included to reflect the themes identified. Presenting the exhibition at Riverside Festival enabled further engagement with a wider diverse community. The focus on co‐production helped build a network of individuals new to research and keen to become involved further. Conclusion Inclusive and democratic co‐production, enriched by participatory art practices, provided a powerful means of enabling our group to create new insights and foster new relationships. Projects like Talking Trials can diversify the research process itself—for example, four co‐researchers have commenced lay research partner roles on trial management groups and a lay advisory group is in development. Patient or Public Contribution Three members of staff at SRCDC were on the project delivery group and involved in the initial project design, subsequently helping to connect us with members of the Riverside community to work as co‐researchers. Two of the SRCDC staff are co‐authors of this manuscript. The project had 13 public co‐researchers guiding the direction of this research and creating the artwork displayed in the art exhibition.

No abstract

No abstract