The global dairy sector is a major source of human nutrition and farmer livelihoods, while also generating manure, an important nutrient for crop production, but one that must be managed to minimize environmental risk. Manure management-manure handling, processing, storage and application-is an important part of managing a dairy system. Rising awareness of environmental stewardship is increasing for dairy production that meets multiple sustainability goals. Importantly, a large body of research has identified a suite of potential manure management strategies (MMS) that can contribute to reduced environmental impact, and in some cases, provide additional benefits for farmers and society. Despite this growing body of technical and agronomically-focused research, there has been far less research on farmer decision making and adoption of MMS. To explore this gap, we conduct a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed articles exploring the drivers of farmer adoption and decision making related to MMS. We focus on high-income countries, where MMS strategies are more diverse and often involve advanced technologies. We find 36 articles across Europe, the United States, and Canada and focus on four key areas associated with MMS practices: (1) farm size and structural characteristics associated with MMS adoption including the relationship of certain MMS to each other; (2) existing adoption of MMS practices; (3) socio-economic and regulatory factors associated with MMS adoption; and (4) individual information, attitudes, and demographics associated with MMS adoption. We identify and discuss three gaps in the existing literature: (1) a dearth of studies exploring farmer adoption of MMS, especially from certain highly productive milk regions;(2) a lack of comparative studies across multiple regions and/or across time to identify more direct casual pathways of decision making; and (3) technical and other feasibility needs for future MMS adoption. These suggest a clear pathway for future research to better understand the myriad factors that influence dairy farmer decision making as it relates to MMS.
Higher education in the global North, and exported elsewhere, is complicit in driving the planet’s socio-ecological crises by teaching how to most effectively marginalize and plunder Earth and human communities. As students and activists within the academic system, we take a firm stand to arrest this cycle, and to redirect education toward teaching how to create conditions for all life to thrive. In this paper, we articulate a research and education agenda for co-constructing knowledge and wisdom, and propose shifts in the ‘ologies from the current, destructive modes to intended regenerative counterparts. We offer to shift from an ontology of separation to that of interconnectedness; from an epistemology of domination to that of egalitarian relationship; and from an axiology of development to that of plural values for world- and meaning-making. Such paradigm shifts reflect the foundational aspirations of the consilient transdiscipline of ecological economics. We analyze several introductory university textbooks in economics, law, and natural sciences, to demonstrate how destructive ‘ologies are taught in North American universities, and how such teaching implicitly undermines critical inquiry and effective challenge. Our strategy for change is to provide a new theoretical framework for education: the regenerative ‘ologies of the Ecozoic’, based on biophysicality, embedded relationality, pluralism, and the sustainable well-being of all members in the community of life.
Existing scholarship on agroecology and food systems education within U.S. colleges and universities has focused primarily on preparing students to be professionals working in agrifood systems. Developing students' skills and competencies, though vitally important, may not suffice for supporting transformative learning. Transformative learning shifts students' perceptions and awareness and informs future actions, constituting a potential avenue for leveraging education to support transformations toward more socially just and ecologically viable agrifood systems. It is unclear, however, what pedagogies and educational practices enable transformative learning. This paper explores the integration of multiple pedagogical innovations within an advanced agroecology course taught at the University of Vermont. Over a decade, the teaching team has made iterative adjustments to course content and pedagogies with the goal of catalyzing action toward transforming agrifood systems. In this paper, we evaluate our pedagogical approach, asking: (1) How well do course content and pedagogy align with our definition of transformative agroecology as transdisciplinary, participatory, action-oriented, and political? (2) How well does our approach enable transformative agroecological learning, and how is that identified? We present our course evaluation as a case study comprising qualitative analyses of course syllabi, student comments on University-administered course evaluations, and most significant change (MSC) reflections. MSC reflections proved to be a valuable method for identifying and assessing transformative learning. Through a curricular review, we found that substantial changes to course content and evaluative assignments between 2010 and 2020 align with a transformative approach to agroecology. This is validated in students' MSC reflections, which provide evidence of transformative learning. In sharing evaluative results, processes, and insights, we aim to contribute to a broader movement of scholar educators committed to iteratively and collaboratively developing transformative pedagogies within agroecology and sustainable food system education. We contend that reflexive practice among educators is necessary to leverage education for transforming agrifood systems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.