Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T04:34:19.881Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Re-integrating agricultural research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Jill Shore Auburn  and
Brian P. Baker
Jill Shore Auburn
Affiliation:
Information Systems Manager, Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program, University of California, Davis, CA 95616.
Brian P. Baker
Affiliation:
Technical Program Coordinator, California Certified Organic Farmers, PO Box 8136, Santa Cruz, CA 95061.
Get access

Abstract

Interaction between farmers and researchers has benefits for both groups. Researchers gain an understanding of farmers' needs and the production system into which new techniques must fit; farmers are helped in adopting new techniques, and get insights into why some techniques are more successful than others. However, communication between farmers and researchers usually has been just from the university to the farmer. The recovery of information from farmers, integration of techniques into whole production systems, and the research priorities of farmers have not been very important to researchers.

An exception has been in sustainable agriculture, where some researchers have been asking farmers what they are doing and what they want the university to do, and spending time observing existing practices before they design research trials. Ideally, farmers and researchers interact as equals, sharing information and expertise. We present examples from California and New York that show that this approach is highly effective, and recommend policie s to expand on this approach in researchfunding, training of research and extension personnel, and the dissemination ofinformation. We also discuss practical ways to carry out those policies, drawn from the experiences of both university and private non-profit organizations.

Keywords

farmer-researcher cooperationadvisory committeeson-fann researchextensionsustainable agriculture
Type
Selected Papers from Conference on “Innovative Policies for Agricultural Research,” Boston, MA, November 21–22, 1991
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , September 1992 , pp. 105 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Auburn, J.S. 1991. Information development for sustainable agriculture. In Proceedings, Sustainable Agriculture in California: A Research Symposium. Publ. 3348. Div. of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Univ. of California, Oakland, pp. 4–1 to 4–7.Google Scholar
2.Baker, B.P., and Smith, D.B.. 1987. Self-identified research needs of New York organic farmers. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 2:107–113.Google Scholar
3.Baker, B., Lipson, M., and Altermann, S.. 1991. Organic farmers' methods and practices. Final report to Univ. of California Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Prog.Google Scholar
4.Bunch, R. 1990. The meaning and benefits of partnership in agricultural research: Past successes—future potentials. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:147–150.Google Scholar
5.Busch, L., and Lacy, W.B.. 1983. Science, Agriculture and the Politics of Research. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
6.Carter, H.O., and Nuckton, C.F. (eds). 1988. Chemicals in the Human Food Chain: Sources, Options, and Public Policy. Agricultural Issues Center, Univ. of California, Davis.Google Scholar
7.Cochrane, W.W. 1979. The Development of American Agriculture: A Historical Analysis. Univ. of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
8.Conway, G. 1990. After the Green Revolution: Sustainable Agriculture for Development. Earthscan, London, England.Google Scholar
9.Cook, T.D., and Campbell, D.T.. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis for Field Settings. Rand McNally College Publishing Co., Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
10.Crookston, R.K. 1991. Decision cases, an avenue for holistic on-farm research and education. Presented at Conf. on Innovative Policies for Agricultural Research, Boston, Massachusetts, November 21–22.Google Scholar
11.Dale, D. 1988. Plant-mediated effects of soil mineral stresses on insects. In Heinrichs, E.A. (ed). Plant Stress-Insect Interactions. John Wiley and Sons, New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
12.Francis, C., King, J., DeWitt, J., J. Bushnell, and L. Lucas. 1990. Participatory strategies for information exchange. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:153–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Friedland, W.H., Barton, A.E., and Thomas, R.J.. 1981. Manufacturing Green Gold: Capital, Labor and Technology in the Lettuce Industry. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
14.Gates, P.N. 1960. The Farmer's Age: Agriculture, 1815–1960. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
15.Hendricks, L. 1991. Comparing organic to conventional culture methods in commercial almond production in central California. In Proceedings, Sustainable Agriculture in California: A Research Symposium. Publ. 3348. Div. of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Univ. of California, Oakland, pp. 2–9 to 2–14.Google Scholar
16.Hightower, J. 1973. Hard Tomatoes, Hard Times. Schenkman Publishing Co., Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
17.Kenney, M. 1986. Biotechnology: The University-Industrial Complex. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, Connecticut.Google Scholar
18.Kloppenburg, J.R. Jr., 1988. First the Seed: The Political Economy of Plant Biotechnology, 1492–2000. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
19.Lockeretz, W., and Anderson, M.D.. 1990. Farmers' role in sustainable agriculture research. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:178–182.Google Scholar
20.Mason, R., Jackson, T.L., and Calvin, L.D.. 1991. Supplementing experimental results with survey data. J. Production Agric. 4:272–277.Google Scholar
21.Miller, R.H. 1990. Learning from each other: A look at how we do research. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:151–152.Google Scholar
22.National Research Council. 1989. Alternative Agriculture. Board on Agriculture. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
23.Nielsen, D.R., Tillotson, P.M., and Vieira, S.R.. 1983. Analyzing field-measured soil-water properties. Agric. Water Management 6:93–109.Google Scholar
24.Rzewnicki, P.E., Thompson, R., Lesoing, G.W., Elmore, R.W., Francis, C.A., Parkhurst, A.M., and Moomaw, R.S.. 1988. On-farm experiment designs and implications for locating research sites. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 3:168–173.Google Scholar
25.Stabinsky, D. 1991. Strategies for research reform in California: Farmers for alternative agriculture research. Presented at Conf. on Innovative Policies for Agricultural Research, Boston, Massachusetts, November 21–22.Google Scholar
26.Stabinsky, D., and Bolin, L.A.. 1990. Reducing the Use of Pesticides in Agriculture: A Farmer's Perspective. California Action Network, Davis.Google Scholar
27.Stevenson, G.W., and Klemme, R.. 1992. Advisory/oversight councils: An alternative approach to farmer/citizen participation in agenda setting at land-grant universities. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 7:111–117.Google Scholar
28.Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program. 1990. Progress Report 1986–1990. Univ. of California, Davis.Google Scholar
29.Thompson, R., and Thompson, S.. 1990. The onfarm research program of Practical Farmers of Iowa. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:163–167.Google Scholar
30.Thompson, R., and Thompson, S.. (n.d.). A Farmer's Guide to On-Farm Research. Practical Farmers of Iowa, Boone.Google Scholar
31.Thornley, K. 1990. Involving farmers in agricultural research: A farmer's perspective. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:174–177.Google Scholar