Abstract

A significant proportion of Australia’s rural landscape is managed by small, lifestyle landowners who derive the majority of their income from non-farming activities. Many of these farms are located in high rainfall, near-urban locations. Concerns have been expressed as to whether these landowners are making the most appropriate use of the land and if they are being adequately engaged by extension providers. As a key stakeholder group in future landscape management, small and lifestyle landowners may be viewed as potential threats or as possible allies for improved natural resource management.

Historically, the needs of the small, lifestyle sector have not been specifically recognised or targeted in extension programs. In addition, part-time or hobby farmers who do not have farming backgrounds may be subject to critical appraisal by full-time farmers (Black et al. 2000). As such, this sector does not always have easy access to land management advice. The Victorian government has recognised the importance of these landowners as managers of our natural resources and the need for them to be informed on best practice land management.

This paper reports progress towards developing our understanding of the needs of the small and lifestyle landowner sector and on constraints to participation in extension activities. A series of in-depth on-farm interviews and off-farm discussion groups in north-east Victoria explored the current attitudes and opinions of the small farm sector towards natural resource management (NRM), extension delivery and information sources. In addition, interviews, discussion groups and a regional workshop for extension practitioners were convened to investigate this group’s suggestions for improved extension strategies and their attitudes towards small landowners.

Key learning points

• Recognition of small, lifestyle landowners as a distinct group, so programs can be appropriately targeted and networks developed.
• Small, lifestyle landowners are generally concerned with lifestyle, not economics, as a driving force of why they own land and how they manage it.
• Small, lifestyle landowners are interested in learning activities which involve presentation of a range of alternative strategies, are based on local information, are presented in a practical way and at an appropriate time (generally outside of business hours) and allow for networking with other small landowners and personal contact with extension providers.

Media summary

Rural landscapes are changing as many Australians are establishing small and lifestyle farms. There is an urgent need to tailor agricultural extension to engage the sector.

Keywords

Small farms, extension, environmental education, lifestyle

Introduction

Rural landscapes are changing as many Australians are seeking country lifestyles on small parcels of the land around and beyond the peri-urban fringe. Almost 16.6 million hectares of Australian land is managed by sub-commercial farmers¹, who typically derive the majority of their income from non-farming activities (Hooper et al. 2002). These small and lifestyle landowners make a substantial contribution to rural communities and manage a significant quantity of relatively high value, potentially highly productive land. There is no one consistent definition of small landowners, and in most statistical databases the definition is based on estimated value of agricultural operations. For the purpose of our qualitative research, however, we have adopted a description of small, lifestyle landowners as those who own between 2 and 100 hectares, and derive most income off-farm.

In Victoria, small farms greatly outnumber large farms, and clusters of small properties dominate the landscape in some high rainfall zone catchment areas (Barr and Karunaratne 2001). Over a quarter of the agricultural land in the state is managed by small landowners (Barr unpub). There are high proportions of the small landowner sector located along the Great Dividing Range of Victoria, extending into New South Wales. This area has been identified as one containing a high percentage of threatened ecosystems (Hollier et al. 2002), as well as having a high aesthetical value. The landscape impact of small and lifestyle properties from a social, economic and environmental perspective is high.

Figure 1 Small farms (Estimated Value of Agricultural Operations between $5 000 and $75 000) as a percentage of all farms in each statistical local area in Victoria.

The traditional family farm still dominates Australian agriculture (Martin 1997), however, the number of large farms has declined by 25% in twenty-five years (Gleeson and Topp 1997). There has been speculation about a change in the distribution of farm sizes. Rates of change have varied but it is not the small farms that are disappearing the fastest from agriculture (Barr and Karunaratne 2001). In north-east Victoria, medium farms have been divided into small block allotments rather than being taken over by larger farmers. Farm subdivision has increased as more people seek rural lifestyles supported by off-farm income. In some shires in the north-east of Victoria, small and lifestyle farming is now the dominate land use (P. O’Dwyer, 2003, pers. comm). Off-farm income is critical to the welfare of families that operate small properties. In Victoria, less than 10% of farm land is managed by farms with a gross income greater than $300 000 (Barr and Karunaratne 2001).

Increasing numbers of people are being attracted to a rural lifestyle. Recent information from the Land Victoria database highlights a significant increase in the number of rural holdings under 50 hectares (ha) created as a result of a subdivision boom. In Victoria, during 2002 alone, over 3000 rural properties between 2 and 50ha were sold (Landata 2002). See Table 1. Often these subdivisions occur in catchments categorised as high priority for protecting ecosystem services.

TABLE 1 Land Sales in Victoria 2000 - 2002.

Year 2000	0 - 1.9999 ha	2 - 20 ha	21 - 50ha	51 - 200ha	201+ha	Total
METRO	174	520	74	36	5	809
NON METRO	420	1932	773	950	315	4390
% Non-Metro sales	10%	44%	18%	22%	7%	100%
Year 2001	0 - 1.9999 ha	2 - 20 ha	21 - 50ha	51 - 200ha	201+ha	Total
METRO	222	587	90	47	9	955
NON METRO	819	2738	1082	1312	339	6290
% Non-Metro sales	13%	44%	17%	21%	5%	100%
Year 2002	0 - 1.9999 ha	2 - 20 ha	21 - 50ha	51 - 200ha	201+ha	Total
METRO	134	451	64	34	3	686
NON METRO	744	2410	941	1001	223	5319
% Non-Metro sales	14%	45%	18%	19%	4%	100%

Summary: 2- 20 ha lots have biggest change over in sales each year (44%), followed by 51-200ha size lots (19-22%); followed by 21-50 ha lots (17 - 18%), and 0-1.99 ha lots (10 - 14%). The larger lot size of '200+ ha' recorded the lowest sales (4 - 7%) of total sales. Land sales over the three years averaged around 5,000 for non-metropolitan Shires. Source: Landata 2002.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that many buyers of small and lifestyle properties have limited knowledge about agriculture and natural resource management but strong environmental values. Concern has been expressed as to whether these landowners are making the most appropriate use of the land (Black et al. 2000). Newcomers to farming often have a limited agricultural background, romanticise country living and find it difficult to participate in group learning activities (Collier 1995, Curtis et al. 1997). Off-farm work has been associated with limited time for involvement in traditional extension programs (Curtis et al. 1997).

The Victorian government’s Future Family Farms Initiative recognises the small and lifestyle landowner sector as important in building vibrant, rural communities. The Initiative originates directly from the government’s agriculture policy, which identifies that family farms have been the mainstay of many rural towns. The policy supports the growth of the small farm sector, and the provision of production, marketing and environmental advice to the sector. Our research is part of a program supported by the state government’s Ecologically Sustainable Agriculture Initiative and the Commonwealth’s Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, investigating the ‘Development of appropriate environmental education training for the small and lifestyle sector’ and ‘Improved delivery mechanisms for sustainable land management’. The research will assist in the exploration of the awareness, values, views and constraints of the small and lifestyle landowner sector in relation to natural resource protection, as these will ultimately influence land use practice.

Engaging small and lifestyle landowners in extension activities requires a change in the way extension agencies approach this sector. Our social research will help to inform such change. The adoption of environmentally sound farming practices must be considered in the social context (Vanclay and Lawrence 1995, Bernet 2001). Extension practitioners will need to fine-tune their methodological approaches, select appropriate decision-support tools and target the needs of sector within specific environmental and socio-economic settings (Patanothai 1997). Land-use change models also suggest that we respond to cues from both our physical environment and our socio-cultural context, and behave to increase both economic and socio-cultural well being. Vanclay and Lawrence (1995) have argued that understanding farming subcultures and developing improved mechanisms to facilitate adoption of resource protection is necessary. More attention needs to be given to landowners’ concerns and opinions, particularly in regards to environmental management and sustainable agriculture.

This paper outlines the attitudes and opinions of small and lifestyle landowners in north east Victoria towards current extension education and training packages, perspectives from small landholders on their training needs, and reports on the views of regional extension providers towards the sector. The emphasis is on improving understanding of small and lifestyle landowners in order to enhance information delivery to engage the sector in sustainable land management. An understanding of the small and lifestyle landowner sector’s views, priorities and cultural contexts will be able to contribute to the development of new relevant, appropriate extension programs.

Methodology

Data was collected using qualitative methods with a stratified sample of small and lifestyle landowners and regional extension providers in north-east Victoria. The sample was stratified so that a cross section of people involved in a range of different land management practices and extension programs contributed to the findings.

Fourteen in-depth interviews (with 17 participants) and three off-farm discussion groups (with 22 participants) were conducted with small and lifestyle landowners. Participants owned between two and one hundred hectares of land in north east Victoria, derived most income from non-farm sources, and not all lived on their properties. The interviews and discussion groups facilitated the generation of a rich picture of people's constructions of their environment and their lifestyle. Observation of participants' land management actions (to determine if actions matched statements) was another method of data collection used in conjunction with on- farm interviews.

One discussion group (with 6 participants), seven interviews (with 8 participants) and one regional workshop (36 participants) were conducted with extension providers. These people were involved in a range of industries and environmental programs, and were working for state government, catchment management authorities, adult education businesses or as Landcare facilitators.

Observations, interviews and workshop results were initially recorded with pen and paper, whilst tape recorders were used in discussion groups. There was no attempt to make the researchers external to the study, because obtaining meaningful results from researching a constructed reality, depends on interactions between the researchers and the respondents. That is, the researchers are passionate participants within the world being investigated (Healy and Perry 2000). A strength of qualitative data is its richness and holism, with a strong potential for revealing complexity nested in a real context (Miles and Huberman 1994). Qualitative data, with its emphasis on people’s ‘lived experience,’ is suited to explore the meanings of people’s place, processes and structures of their lives: their perceptions, assumptions, prejudgments and connecting these meanings to the social world.

To offset researcher bias, key principles from Chambers (1991) were followed when conducting interviews and facilitating group discussions². This allowed for the formation of an unhurried, balanced and representative view, which included uncovering aspects which are often out of sight and usually unmentioned. Using different data sources (a range of landowners with various aims for their properties, and extension providers) and alternative methods (group and individual discussions, workshops, structured and unstructured questions) helped to provide more valid results by enabling the crosschecking of information to get closer to the truth using successive approximations (triangulation) (Chambers and Guijt 1995).

As part of the study scoping, a preliminary survey was conducted to assist in our understanding of the small and lifestyle landowner sector. Participants at a small-farm field day held in central Victoria were invited to complete a questionnaire (46 people). The questionnaire included closed-ended questions about the demographics of the participants and their environmental concerns. Respondents were also invited to provide comments. Likert scales were used to gauge attitudes towards sustainability and land management. Participants ranked issues of concern and the perceived value of the sources of environmental information to enable improved land management decisions.

Results

Preliminary survey

The major environmental concerns identified by small landowners as part of the preliminary survey were the threat of salinity and other soil degradation issues, declining native habitat, weed and pest issues. Respondents valued rural lifestyle and had a strong land stewardship ethic. All participants derived the majority of their income off-farm. The preliminary study highlighted a belief that natural resource management information pathways were difficult to access and that the landowners felt marginalised when they participated in extension activities with larger property owners. Traditional productivity based extension programs were rarely used. Scheduling of extension activities and time pressures due to off-farm work were cited as the main reasons for lack of involvement. Most land managers nominated ‘lifestyle’ before farm profit as a driver for investing in the land. There was a high level of enthusiasm to attend learning-based activities in land management, especially if the activities were targeted exclusively at the small and lifestyle sector.

Newsletters, neighbours and newspapers were the major sources of natural resource management information exchange. Consultants and the world wide web were not commonly used as information sources or decision-support tools. Neighbours with large farms played a significant role in providing technical information to newcomers. Social networks were acknowledged as important for information exchange because of time constraints associated with off-farm work and the lack of opportunity to attend learning activities. The preliminary study suggested that social networks play an important role in natural resource management practice within the sector, and this warrants further exploration. New landowners in farming communities rarely sought expert advice on land purchase in terms of land capacity and capability however, views and vegetation (specifically trees) were keenly sought after.

Information sources accessed by small lifestyle landowners

Interviews and discussion groups with small landowners revealed that a variety of sources of information and training were accessed by the sector. These included:

Printed reference material

• Books (particularly those aimed at new, small, landowners)
• Magazines (Australian and New Zealand sources – general farming, industry specific or small farming and alternative living)
• Newspapers (especially The Weekly Times)
• Pamphlets from research organisations

Other land managers

• Friends, neighbours
• People with similar enterprises
• Landcare groups
• Industry groups

Non-print media

• Radio (eg CountryHour)
• Television (eg Landline, Totally Wild)
• Internet (particularly used to research areas where there is little Australian information)

Other

• Adult education providers
• Consultants
• Stock and station agents
• Rural supplies stores, plant nurseries
• Department of Primary Industries/Department of Sustainability and Environment
• Local council
• Field days – annual (eg Elmore, Seymour) or ad hoc (eg Grasslands Society)
• Work colleagues (for landowners who have an off-farm job in an organisation which is involved with land management)

Not all landowners used all of the above sources, and some people had conflicting views on the value of each. For example, some people did not read pamphlets at all, others found that neighbouring farmers perceived the lifestyle landowners as too alternative, so did not interact with them and share information.

Many small landowners stressed that they did not accept knowledge from any one source without question, rather they integrated the new information with their existing knowledge and ideas, and considered a range of viewpoints.

Landcare was generally well-received and most participants were members of a Landcare group. Landcare groups were seen to be useful starting points to find out land management advice and to access funding for environmental works. Landcare facilitators were perceived as very helpful. One participant said:

“I think Landcare, the advent of Landcare, is one of the best things that has happened in the last 12 years to the professional farmer and for the hobby farmer, because they coordinate and focus on these problems so that you are not alone, you can go and get advice and get help, and the subsidies, those three things.”

Goals and drivers influencing the small lifestyle sector to undertake certain management strategies

Small and lifestyle landowners in interviews and discussion groups gave many reasons for adopting their particular land management strategies. Conservation activities were often carried out because of an environmental ethic, as opposed to being incentive driven. Choice of agricultural enterprise/s resulted from a consideration of factors such as labour requirements, attitudes to working with animals, interest in diversification, size of land, or because of an interest in the particular enterprise.

Specific agricultural practices were mainly adopted because people understood those strategies as being the recommended or preferred methods. Because most small, lifestyle landowners were not experienced in agriculture, they were not using management strategies that had been passed on from generation to generation, rather they were accessing information from a wide range of sources. Additionally, personal values influenced the choice of some management practices, for example, selling livestock direct to abattoirs rather than putting them through the saleyards because of animal welfare concerns.

Factors contributing to the decision to live on a small property were related to the perceived lifestyle benefits of living outside of a city (space, freedom, quietness), an interest in improving the environment, or a desire to try farming (to have an outdoor, busy lifestyle, to make some ‘pocket money’ or as self-actualisation and setting themselves challenges).

Small landowner views towards education and training sources

Discussion groups and interviews with the sector revealed mixed reactions towards education and training sources. Aspects of education and training that were deemed positive included:

• One on one information, especially if extension providers visit the property
• Local information (eg Land for Wildlife, Landcare)
• Personal invitations to attend an activity
• Inclusion of contact numbers on written information
• Practical courses run by people who have been through the same experiences
• Opportunities to visit other properties (large or small) to assess the success of various approaches to land management and to build networks.

Some negative reactions stemmed from:

• Extension providers not responding to questions and inquiries, or suggesting the landowners contact someone else; “it’s not my job”
• Feeling like a guinea pig, being used to test new regulations, with a belief that positive actions were not sufficiently recognised by extension providers, but rather that they concentrated only on the problems
• Government staff who were not perceived as being able to relate to the small landowner’s situation, focussing too narrowly and lacking an holistic view of the system
• Reduced access to government extension providers
• Perception of being treated unfairly; government extension being seen to help large farmers more than the small landowners, despite both being tax payers
• Activities being held during the week, which often results in difficulties for small, lifestyle landowners wanting to attend (the exceptions being retirees)
• Domination in education and training activities by larger farmers
• Activities that are perceived as not well structured nor practical enough
• Lack of recognition of small, lifestyle landowners’ interests that may conflict with traditional agricultural management styles and no provision of alternative strategies (eg alternatives to synthetic fertilisers, poison baits or introduced pasture species).

Training needs identified by the sector

Education and training needs identified through interviews and discussion groups fell into three broad categories, ‘getting started,’ ‘business management’ and ‘conservation and environment.’ The responses were generated through both direct questioning and indirect discussion. Needs marked with an asterisk (*) are an interpretation by the researchers, they may have been cited as a learning or an area of concern within a discussion, they were not direct answers to a question about education and training needs. The following topics are not listed in order of priority.

Getting started / Reality check

• Local services – what is available and which people are trustworthy
• Information on fair prices for goods and services (eg fencing, plant tubestock)
• Equipment needs on a small property
• Information for prospective buyers, so people have a better idea of what they are getting into (eg the weeds that might not be visible until livestock are removed; the amount of work required and the constant need to be managing the land; the costs of establishing infrastructure and long time lag until such investments pay off)
• Infrastructure requirements for particular enterprises, for example, proximity of abattoirs that can service the producer’s needs*.

Business management

• Skills to establish workable cooperatives of small, lifestyle landowners
• Leasing arrangements (striking a fair deal between parties)*
• Diversification opportunities and feasible options for small properties
• Specific enterprise issues – eg livestock health, olive processing, orchard protection from birds*, pasture species recognition
• Organic, environmentally friendly and alternative management strategies
• Drought management and recovery (pasture recovery, feeding)*
• Tax issues – registering as an agricultural business – obtaining the supporting documentation
• Selling and marketing.

Conservation and environment

• Understanding the grants/assistance available for land management activities
• Management of bushland*
• Weed control methods, weed identification, reason why weeds should be controlled, the need to follow up the next year, how to access biocontrol agents, organic control, control on difficult to access land, using burning as a management tool
• Strategies to keep grass down on properties with no livestock
• Management of plants and wildlife in drought*.

Education and training delivery needs

A number of issues relating to the delivery of education and training were identified in discussion groups and interviews with small lifestyle landowners, including:

• Recognition of small landowners as a distinct group, so programs can be targeted to them, and so they can form their own networks
• Specific targeting of education and training to absentee owners, including land management approaches that are not time consuming or costly
• Sufficient notice of events, especially for absentee owners; alternative communication channels; weekend access to training
• Environmental education for town/urban people (whether or not they own a small property)
• The need to learn details from other, practising, landowners, as written material tends to only teach principles not the subtleties required for particular situations
• A coordinated approach so that all the relevant information for the sector can be sourced from one location
• More widespread pest plant and animal control programs, not just for specific groups
• Access to information for prospective small landowners
• Access to written background material before a field day or visit by an expert.

Extension providers’ workshop

• Best extension pathways as identified by extension providers:
  64 % believed in one on one extension for small landowners
  72 % believed a group facilitation approach with larger and smaller landholders was appropriate
  20 % supported group facilitation with small landowners only
  52 % supported more participatory based extension (as opposed to expert driven extension)
  20 % supported expert driven information transfer
• 96 % of extension providers at the workshop believed they have from ‘some’ to a ‘thorough’ understanding of the actions they can take too effectively communicate and involve small and lifestyle landowners
• All participants identified inclusion of small, lifestyle landowners in extension programs as being important
• 88 % of participants identified land use change leading to sub-division as a problem, including 28 % believing it to be a very serious problem
• 88% of participants agreed strongly with the statement, ‘social networks between larger farmers and small landowners are important in the exchange of information’
• 28 % of participants agreed with the statement ‘most small, lifestyle landowners are actively working towards improving their land’s environmental sustainability’
• All participants agreed with the statement, ‘there needs to be stronger linkages between various extension/education providers to better target small, lifestyle landowners.’

Extension providers discussion group

Some key points to come out of the discussion group were:

• Small landowners ranged from 25% to 80% of the participants’ clientele
• The sector is a mixed bag, some people are seeking out help, others want to be left alone, others do not know the Department of Primary Industries/Department of Sustainability and Environment exists
• Small areas can make it difficult to implement conservation activities that don’t take over the whole farm
• Absentee owners can be frustrating, even for other lifestylers, eg weeds
• Need to better target small lifestyle landowners, ideas include night and weekend activities, recognising that they don’t have necessarily have a production interest, and that they want basic, simple information because they are not necessarily familiar with land management at all
• Neighbours can be a major source of information for many small landowners, but this information may not be accurate
• Small landowners can be very enthusiastic and receptive to new ideas compared to traditional farmers
• Some participants thought small landowners preferred 1 on 1 extension, others thought they preferred group approaches
• Suggested an expo style form of extension, not just natural resource management, so people can move around and find the topics of interest to them.

Extension provider interviews

Extension providers acknowledged the limited time available to small, lifestyle landowners to participate in activities, especially during business hours. In addition the need to provide a wide variety of information (from farming and environment to alternative living) was recognised, along with the need to provide more information to prospective or new small landowners. An interest in learning and an initially low skill base were factors suggested to be common amongst the sector. Absentee owners and lifestyle landowners who live on-farm, were recognised to be quite different – absentee owners generally spend considerably less time managing the land. Field days and workshops with a practical focus were identified as of particular interest to small landowners. Challenges working with the sector included the limited area that could be modified with a new practice (due to the small farm size) and the high turnover of farms, resulting in the need for extension providers need to revisit properties to keep teaching the same topics to new owners.

Discussion

The research to date shows that small landowners in north-east Victoria access a variety of sources of information and advice, and there are conflicting opinions on the value of each source. The most popular sources of information are other farmers in similar situations, books, magazines and newsletters. Sourcing information is not a problem for most participants, however there were suggestions that relevant information be collated in one area, to make it easier to access (reduced time and effort for landholders). Most small landowners commented that they preferred to be able to access a variety of sources and viewpoints, to then develop their own informed opinions of how to manage the land. As such, any collation of information by extension agencies should not also involve compaction or reduction of information.

There are various goals and drivers affecting small landowners’ management decisions, further research is needed to better understand why people adopt certain strategies. For most small landowners the driver to buy a small property is a lifestyle rather than an economic consideration. In one case where the initial driver was economics, the farm had not been able to support the family, but the decision to continue living on the land was then taken because of lifestyle, and off-farm income sought to supplement farm income. Because most farms are managed/owned for lifestyle reasons, targeting education for this sector will require a different approach to those employed in traditional farming sectors; for example these people will be less likely to respond to education/training programs offering strategies to improve productivity or profitability. Other reasons for buying a small property were interests in farming and the environment.

This research has identified that successful delivery of training and education programs for small landowners requires consideration of the sector’s desire for personal contact, local information, practical learning activities and appropriate timing. Landcare was generally well received by small, lifestyle landowners, probably because such groups do allow for the aforementioned elements. Appropriate timing involves ensuring adequate notice of events is given and that the activities are conducted outside of business hours. Further consideration is also required for absentee owners, perhaps basing activities around long weekends and school holidays or providing information about similar training available at alternative venues and times.

Another important issue in education delivery is the tailoring of training programs (and communication processes) for the small landowner audience. Traditional farmers, managing larger areas of land, are perceived as having different goals and stronger opinions on appropriate farm management, which do not necessarily match the needs and views of small landowners. As such, traditional farmers can exert a domineering and intimidating influence on small landowners participating in generalist eduction and training. Small landowners and extension providers noted that the sector has a wide variety of interests pertaining to desired management styles and enterprises, and these may conflict with traditional approaches, as such, providing a number of alternative management strategies is an important aspect of extension to this sector.

A significant benefit of targeted training is that it facilitates the formation of networks with other practicing small landowners, something many small landowners and extension providers suggested would be beneficial. This could also help with identified needs of farmers who are wishing to form cooperatives or be involved with leasing arrangements with other small farmers.

Training needs that small landowners identified can be divided into three broad categories, ‘getting started,’ ‘business management’ and ‘conservation and environment.’ Given these land managers are often ‘time-poor’ it may be necessary to conduct education and training that addresses a range of these issues at one time, as opposed to only one or two topics.

Some organisations already provide educational literature for people considering purchasing a small property. Providing a central point for all potential small landowners to access this type of information may be an effective way of meeting the education needs of new lifestyle landowners. However, it was found in the study that people rarely seek advice prior to purchasing land. Landowners suggested that topics for inclusion in a new landowner booklet should be guides to, and price estimates for, local services, as well as likely infrastructure and equipment requirements for various activities. Extension providers also noted the need for land management and planning training to be provided to new landowners.

Extension providers at the workshop generally considered sub division to be a problem, and a low percentage thought landowners were actively working to improve sustainability. This conflicts with landowner views on these issues. However extension providers do recognise that many small landowners are very interested in learning new skills. Identified challenges of working with small landowners were the small areas of land involved, low skill bases (in terms of land management) and a high turnover of properties.

The study has also found that participants are interested in being part of ‘new’ work to provide improved pathways for involvement in skill development and extension activities. All participants recognised the need for more active recognition of the small and lifestyle sector in catchment management and industry development programs. Small, lifestyle landowners have a major stake in catchment resource management due to the appeal of owning land in areas with high amenity and biodiversity values. There is a need to provide improved education and training opportunities to the sector and to recognise the sector as an important contributor to sustainable land management.

Results to date suggest that delivery of information and training to engage small, lifestyle landowners in sustainable land management will need to consider the following:

• landowners are generally concerned with lifestyle, not economics, as a driving force of land ownership and management
• landowners often require large amounts of information when they first move to a rural property, and can feel overwhelmed with their lack of knowledge, and, subsequently, are often keen to participate in learning activities
• only limited time is available for education and training
• many small landowners are interested in being presented with a range of alternative land management strategies, specific for small property, with a practical and local focus
• many small landowners desire to network with others in similar situations
• many small landowners access newsletters, newspapers and neighbours as primary sources of information, but are also aware of, and use, many other channels of information.

Future research will consider new extension tools and delivery mechanisms to address these considerations.

Acknowledgments

The authors of this paper would like to acknowledge the Rural Industry Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC) and the Victorian State Government for funding of this research. The views expressed and the conclusions reached in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of RIRDC or the Victorian State Government.

References

Anderson, S., Lowe, K., Preece, K., and Crouch, A. (2001). Incorporating Biodiversity into Environmental Management Systems for Victorian Agriculture. Department of Natural Resources and Environment: East Melbourne.

Barr, N. (unpublished). Victoria’s Small Farms, an update. In possession of the author.

Barr, N. and Cary, J. (2000). Influencing Improved Natural Resource Management on Farms: a Guide to Understanding Factors Influencing the Adoption of Sustainable Resource Practices, Canberra: Bureau of Rural Sciences.

Barr, N., and Karunaratne, K. (2001). Victoria’s Small Farms, NRE Technical Report. Centre for

Land Protection Research, Department of Natural Resources and Environment: Bendigo.

Bernet, T., Ortiz, O., Estrada, R.D., Quiroz, R. and Swinton, S.M. (2001). Tailoring agricultural extension to different contexts: a user-friendly farm household model to improve decision-making for participatory research, Agricultural Systems 69 183-198.

Black, A., Duff, J., Saggers, S., Baines, P., Jennings, A. & BowenBlack, P. (2000). Rural communities and rural social issues: priorities for research, RIRDC Publication No. 00/130, Project No. ECU-4A, Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, ACT.

Chambers, R. & Guijt, I. (1995). PRA - five years later. Where are we now? http://www-trees.slu.se/newsl/26/26chambe.htm

Collier, R.A. (1995). Barriers to utilising the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources extension and advisory services. Technical Report 1. Department of Conservation and Natural Resources: Benalla

Curtis, A., MacKay, J., Lockwood, M., Van Nouhuys, M., and Graham, M. (1997). Exploring landholder willingness and capacity to change in the Goulburn Broken Dryland. Charles Sturt University: Albury.

Gleeson, T. and Topp, V. (1997). Broadacre farming today — forces for change. Outlook 97 (Volume 2: Agriculture). Proceedings of the National Agricultural and Resources Outlook Conference, Canberra. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics: Canberra (pp 53–66).

Healy, M. & Perry, C. (2000). Comprehensive criteria to judge validity and reliability of qualitative research within the realism paradigm, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 3 (3) pp. 118-126.

Hollier, C., Reid, M. and Francis, J. (2002). Small and lifestyle farms: has the horse bolted for biodiversity gains? Proceedings of the Conference on Rural Land Use Change, State of Victoria (DSE) 2003.

Hooper, S., Martin, P., Love, G. and Fisher, B.S. (2002). ‘Get big or get out’ - Is this mantra still appropriate for the new century? Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics Conference Paper 02.12, 24th Biennial Conference of the Australian Society of Animal Production, Adelaide, 11 July 2002.

Landata (2002). A guide to Property Values 2001. Landata, Property Sales Information. Melbourne.

Martin, P. (1997). The constitution of power in landcare: a poststructuralist perspective with modernist undertones. In Lockie, S. and Vanclay, F. (eds) Critical Landcare. Centre for Social Research: Wagga Wagga (pp 45–56).

Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Sage: London.

Patanothai, A. (1997). Systems approaches to farm management in variable environments. In: Teng, P.S., Kropff, M.J. ten Berge, H.F.M., Dent, J.B., Lansigan, F.P., van Laar, H.H. (Eds.), Applications of Systems Approaches at the Farm and Regional Levels, Vol. 1. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, pp 19-29.

Pretty, J. (2002). Agriculture. Reconnecting People, Land and Nature. Earthscan: UK.

Vanclay, F. and Lawrence, G. (1995). The Environmental Imperative: Eco-social Concerns for Australian Agriculture. Central Queensland University Press: Rockhampton.

¹ Sub-commercial farms are defined as establishments with some agricultural activities but with an estimated value of agricultural operations of less than $22 500 (Hooper et al. 2002).

² These principles include listening instead of lecturing; probing instead of passing onto a new topic; taking time instead of rushing, being unimposing instead of important (ie not being an expert).