Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:13:17.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Building a farmer-centered land grant university organic agriculture program: A Midwestern partnership

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2007

Kathleen Delate  and
Jerald DeWitt
Kathleen Delate*
Affiliation:
Departments of Agronomy and Horticulture, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 50011, USA
Jerald DeWitt
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 50011, USA
*
*Corresponding author: kdelate@iastate.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Based on citizen demand, Iowa State University (ISU) established the first organic specialist faculty position at a US land grant university in 1997, as a shared appointment in the departments of horticulture and agronomy, with a 70% extension and 30% research split. By 1999, a national survey determined that ISU had reached the upper percentile of organic research, extension and educational activities at land grant universities in the US. This result was attributed to a series of successful Organic Agriculture Focus Groups in 1998, convened to help direct the new organic research and extension program at ISU. Partnerships with the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture and the College of Agriculture facilitated the ISU sustainable agriculture extension leader and organic specialist‘s participation in an extensive focus group dialogue with a diverse group of farmers (organic and conventional), agribusiness professionals, bankers and consumers in six agricultural communities across Iowa. Focus group responses included the need for organic research at the university level, since the majority of organic farmers (65%) were receiving their information from other organic farmers and non-governmental publications. Paramount in the needs assessment was the establishment of organic research sites across the state to demonstrate the economic and environmental benefits associated with organic farming practices over the long term. Specific outcomes-based extension needs were articulated, which led to the development of an annual schedule of organic workshops, field days and conferences. In 2001, in a survey of 300 farmers to assess the outcomes of the Organic Agriculture Program, all respondents (39% return rate) reported benefiting from an extension organic program. Similar to focus group results, farmers rated workshops and field days as the most likely venue for information dissemination. As a result of organic farming practices, 90% of respondents reported an increase in soil quality and 67% reported a 6–30% increase in farm income. The success of land grant university organic programs will be dependent upon administrative support, sufficient resources and community involvement in the decision-making process.

Keywords

extensionfocus groupslong-term researchoutcomes-basedproducer-drivensurveys
Type
Research Article
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , June 2004 , pp. 80 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

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

1Hartman Group. 2001. Natural Sensibility, Typification of the New Wellness Consumer, Vol. 3(2). Hartman Group, Bellevue, WA.Google Scholar
2Greene, C. and Kremen, A. 2002. US Organic Farming: A decade of expansion. In Agricultural Outlook (November). USDA-Economic Research Service, Washington, DC. p. 31–34.Google Scholar
3Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship (IDALS). 1997. Annual Survey on Organic Production. Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship Diversification Bureau, Des Moines, IA.Google Scholar
4Lipson, M. 1999. Looking for the ‘O’ Word. Organic Farming Research Foundation, Santa Cruz, CA.Google Scholar
5Norgaard, R.B. and Sikor, T.O. 1995. The methodology and practice of agroecology. In Altieri, M. (ed.). Agroecology. Westview Press, Boulder, CO. p. 21–40.Google Scholar
6Vogtmann, H. 1990. Research structure in biological farming: general view, justification, development. In Biological Farming in Europe. REUR Technical Series, 12. Proceedings of the Expert Consultation. FAO, Bern, Switzerland. p. 41–47.Google Scholar
7Høgh-Jensen, H. 1998. Systems theory as a scientific approach towards organic farming. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 16: 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Walz, E. 1999. Final Results of the Third Biennial National Organic Farming Survey. Organic Farming Research Foundation, Santa Cruz, CA.Google Scholar
9Sooby, J. 2001. State of the States. Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF) Bulletin 6. OFRF, Santa Cruz, CA. p. 14–16.Google Scholar
10Chambers, R., Pacey, A., and Thrupp, L.A. 1989. Farmer First: Farmer Innovation and Agricultural Research. Intermediate Technology Publications. Bootstrap Press, New York.Google Scholar
11Delate, K. 2002. Using an agroecological approach in farming systems research. HortTechnology 12(3): 345–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Altieri, M.A. 1995. Agroecology. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
13Delate, K. and Cambardella, C. 1999. Comparison of organic and conventional rotations at the Neely-Kinyon Long-Term Agroecological Research (LTAR) site. Iowa State University Armstrong Research and Demonstration Farm Progress Report. College of Agriculture, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
14USDA-AMS. 2002. National Organic Program. Final rule: 7 CFR Part 205. US Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Marketing Service, Washington, DC. Available at Web site http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop (verified 10 July 2002).Google Scholar
15Kelly, W.C. 1990. Minimal use of synthetic fertilizers in vegetable production. HortScience 25: 168–169.Google Scholar
16Niggli, U. and Lockeretz, W. 1996. Development of research in organic farming. In International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) (eds). Fundamentals of Organic Agriculture. IFOAM, Switzerland. p. 9–23.Google Scholar
17Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship (IDALS). 2001. Annual Survey on Organic Production. Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship Diversification Bureau, Des Moines, IA.Google Scholar
18Wander, M.M., Traina, S.J., Stinner, B.R., and Peters, S.E. 1994. Organic and conventional management effects on biologically active soil organic matter pools. Soil Science Society of America Journal 58: 1130–1139.Google Scholar
19Astier, M. 1990. Developing Low-input Energy Saving Vegetable Cropping Systems for Small Farmers in Salinas Valley. Association of Community Based Education, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
20Altieri, M.A., Trujillo, J., Astier, M., Gersper, P., and Bakx, W. 1991. Low-input technology proves viable for limited-resources farmers in Salinas Valley. California Agriculture 45:20–22.Google Scholar
21Astier, M., Gersper, P.L., and Buchanan, M. 1994. Combining legumes and compost: A viable alternative for farmers in conversion to organic agriculture. Compost Science and Utilization 2:80–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22Organic Trade Association (OTA). 2001. OTA Newsletter. OTA, Greenfield, MA.Google Scholar
23Dimitri, C. and Greene, C. 2002. Recent growth patterns in the US organic foods market. USDA–Economic Research Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
24Delate, K., Duffy, M., Chase, C., Holste, A., Friedrich, H., and Wantate, N. 2003. An economic comparison of organic and conventional grain crops in a long-term agroecological research (LTAR) site in Iowa. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 18(2): 59–69.Google Scholar
25Brumfield, R.G., Rimal, A. and Reiners, S. 2000. Comparative cost analyses of conventional, integrated crop management, and organic methods. HortTechnology 10(4): 785–793.Google Scholar
26Lampkin, N.H. and Padel, S. 1994. Organic farming and agricultural policy in Western Europe: An overview. In Midmore, P., Lampkin, N.H. (eds). The Economics of Organic Farming: An International Perspective. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. p. 437–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27Doran, J.W. and Peck, S. 2003. Editorial. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 18(4):173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF). 2002. Scientific Congress on Organic Agricultural Research. Available at Web site http:/www.ofrf.org/scoar/index.html (verified 10 July 2002).Google Scholar
29National Research Council. 2003. Frontiers in Agricultural Research: Food, Health, Environment, and Communities. NRC–Committee on Opportunities in Agriculture. National Academies Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar