Farmer research: Conventional experiences and guidelines for alternative agriculture and multi-functional agro-ecosystems

Abstract

Crop producers are challenged to operate profitably, use resources efficiently, meet high standards of quality and protect the environment, while sustaining rural economies and societies. Cropping systems are generally fine-tuned and improved through changes that have small effects which can often be verified only through research. The processes and successes of two farmer research projects were studied. Results of these studies, information from other sources and the authors' reflections on their own experiences were integrated to develop guidelines for the implementation of farmer research projects for alternative agriculture and multi-functional agro-ecosystems with diverse stakeholders. Surveys were mailed to 118 farmers currently or previously participating in a farmer research project, and to 15 advisors. Responses show that involvement in a farmer research project was profitable, stimulating, enjoyable and worthwhile, despite a substantial time requirement. Tillage and soil fertility research had greater impact on annual farm profit than research on other topics. Farmers and advisors emphasized the importance of the farmers' roles in identification of research topics, research planning and implementation, and interpretation of the results. Replicated trials conducted over 2 or 3 years were recognized as necessary to adequately verify practices for the corn-soybean rotation of eastern Nebraska, USA. Such trials may need to be complemented with alternative research approaches for improving alternative agriculture and multi-functional agroecosystems where knowledge about some system components is relatively scarce and there is a need to evaluate long-term effects. In conclusion, organized farmer research is an efficient means to cropping system improvement. Guidelines are given for initiation and implementation of farmer research projects.

Farmers’ Own Research: Organic Farmers’ Experiments in Austria and Implications for Agricultural Innovation Systems

“…The capacity of farmers to experiment is widely accepted within the scientific community (e.g. Bentley, 2006;Hoffmann et al, 2007;Johnson, 1972;Maat, 2011;Reij & Waters-Bayer, 2001b;Sumberg & Okali, 1997;Tambo & Wünscher, 2014;Wortmann et al, 2005). Literature in the context of participatory research mainly focuses on cases of active experimenters (Haverkort et al, 1991;Reij & Waters-Bayer, 2001b), 'research-minded farmers' (Biggs, 1990) and 'farmer innovators' (Critchley, 2000;Tambo & Wünscher, 2014), and thus little is known about less active experimenters, or the relative proportions of active and less active experimenters.…”

“…This may be due to the fact that these farmers are more aware of their experiments and define themselves as experimenters, in contrast to the majority of farmers that presumably do not see experiments as particular research processes but rather as a normal part of every day farming activities (Saad, 2002). Characteristics such as replication and documentation are seen as crucial for evaluating the success of experiments and for fine-tuning production systems (Wortmann et al, 2005).…”

“…replications, standardizations and quantifications (Wilbois et al, 2004), but there is little if any evidence that training farmers in more formal research methods would make their experiments more effective (Sumberg et al, 2003). Additionally, such a formalization is likely to increase the cost and risk of experimentation (Sumberg & Okali, 1997), and requires additional time (Wortmann et al, 2005). Some authors even suspect that introducing scientific methods may sidetrack farmers into pseudo-scientific trials that do not take advantage of their own knowledge, especially when formal research is seen as more valid and relevant (Saad, 2002).…”

“…Literature on farmers' experiments mainly focused on few examples (Bentley, 2006) of active experimenters within the farming community (Haverkort et al, 1991;Reij & Waters-Bayer, 2001b), outstanding 'research-minded farmers' (Biggs, 1990) and 'farmer innovators' (Critchley, 2000;Reij & Waters-Bayer, 2001a), and most presented experiments concerned plant production issues (Sumberg & Okali, 1997;van Veldhuizen, Waters-Bayer, Ramirez, Johnson, & Thompson, 1997). Furthermore, most sources refer to experiments carried out in the context of participatory research (Bentley et al, 2010;Kandel et al, 2008;Wortmann et al, 2005), i.e. experiments together with researchers and extensionists and not independent farmers' experimentation.…”

Farmer innovation diffusion via network building: a case of winter greenhouse diffusion in China

“…In the last three decades or so, the international community has paid increasing attention to farmer innovation, defined as any technology invention or improvement made by rural people in order to cope with the complexity of local resource, ecological, economic, and social conditions (Chambers 1983;Chambers et al 1989;Biggs 1990;Reijnties et al 1992;Rajasekaran 1993;Critchley et al 1999;World Bank 2004;Wortmann et al 2005). While the emphasis has been on the practicality of local knowledge and farmer innovation within the community, we know little about how farmer innovation can be successfully diffused to other rural areas with different ecological, economic, and social environments.…”