Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

The value of a boundary organization in mediating knowledge on sustainable farming systems

Lisa Lobry de Bruyn

School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351 Email llobryde@une.edu.au

Abstract

What is the value of a boundary organisation in offering the “space” for farming systems research (FSR) and local knowledge to interact? Can it offer a space that allows for non-linear discussion of research findings and the potential for farmer experimentation/expressionism of FSR to test its performance “in time” and “in place”. Scientific research demands that the realities of time and place are kept under control to allow for replication and scientific rigour. However, when it comes to performance criteria of a farming system then time and place are important variables that need to be tested through local application. Local adaptation of FSR is often required to test its true worth since most research is undertaken under circumstances and conditions different to those found locally. The ability to transform scientific knowledge to specific contexts is often highly dependent on willingness of farmers to co-operate, to take an idea on and place it into action. Can a boundary organisation mediate between FSR and local farmers to improve the level of practice change based on FSR? We analysed 8 field days (about on-farm research) and 1 forum with a total of 138 participants (57% farmers, 11% agribusiness, 12% researchers, 17% NRM and 2% other) to examine if we are creating the “space” for such discussion of FSR “in time” and “in place”.

Key Words

Farm sustainability, farmer experimentation, farming systems research, local knowledge, scientific knowledge, interaction

Introduction

Research published by Carr and Wilkinson (2005) explains the role of a boundary organization (like Catchment Management Authorities or producer-led research and development groups) in bridging the often perceived gap between farmers, scientists, and others working in natural resource management. The boundary organization works at the interface between science and practice and exemplifies the “blurring and blending” of farmers’ and scientists’ knowledge and roles. The role of a boundary organization is to create a “space” where farmers and scientists can meet and interact with knowledge produced by participatory (science -in-action model, local and contextual) or linear (ready-made-science, global and generic) models. Hence it is a “space” that blends and blurs the distinctions often made between the farming and scientific communities in regard to their knowledge generation and delivery styles, and is a “space” where knowledge is contextual, socially produced and is not completely global or local. In this paper we examine our role as a boundary organization in a National R&D program – Grain and Graze II - whose overall aim is to make a significant contribution to “increasing knowledge, capability, respect and confidence of mixed farming communities, thus enabling them to manage a more viable and environmentally sustainable mixed farming system that can adapt quickly to changing climatic, market and policy conditions” (Project Specification Document DEEDI/GRDC DAQ00162, p2). The northern New South Wales component plans to deliver on practice change by increasing farmer adoption in: planting perennial species; maintaining ground cover at 40% (cropping) and 60% (grazing systems); diversifying crops/pastures and forages; planting of ley pastures and use of reduced/zero tillage, largely in priority sub-catchments of the Border Rivers-Gwydir Catchment Management Authority (BR-G CMA). How effective we have been as a boundary organization or mediating structure in promoting these activities, and forming local networks with local farmers, with some of those farmers also co-operating in conducting on-farm research, has been assessed through evaluations of the 8 field days and 1 forum held in 2011-2012.

Methods

Data Collection

The monitoring and evaluation approach and survey was approved by the University of New England’s Human Ethics Committee (approval code HE10-212). The research team designed an entry and exit survey that can be used repeatedly at all field days and forums to address the key objectives of the Grain and Graze II programme. A number of field days and forums were held over the 2011-2012 that collected both entry and exit data (Table 1). All of the field days were focussed on a co-operator (farmer) who was conducting paddock-scale experiments of particular practices that address the sustainability of the mixed farming enterprise. The forum, specifically addressed the nature of an ideal farming system for the Delungra area. The field days and forum are summarised in Table 1. The monitoring and evaluation examined 4 key questions through a combination of likert questions and accompanying follow-up open-ended questions with a written response. Several responses to likert questions were combined to address the 4 key monitoring and evaluation questions which are:

  • Did the event achieve its objectives?
  • Was the event useful for participants?
  • Did it contain new information?
  • What is the likelihood of implementation?

The likert scale was from 1 to 5 with a value of 1 suggested low level of agreement with the statement whereas a value of 5 indicated high level of agreement with the statement. To reflect on the meaning of the likert responses the follow-up open-ended question allowed for farmers to clarify their response. In some of the field days the attendance was too low to be worthwhile in terms of analysis, and the other difficulty we had was that some people still returned an incomplete form, while others make no attempt to provide written feedback. In future field days we made more certain that evaluation surveys were returned complete to reduce the incomplete survey percentage and increase the level of written feedback.

Table 1. Field days and forum as part of Grain and Graze II Northern NSW in 2011-2012.

Location

Topic

date

No of Agribusiness participants

No of Farmers

Respondents to entry survey

Respondents to exit survey

Total attendance at event

Glenwood, Gravesend, Chris and Heather Robinson

Effect of gypsum, and nitrogen on pasture production

29 Mar,
2011

1

4

4

4

7

Weegowrie, Inverell, David and Alex Mason

Role of summer cover cropping with Lab Lab.

6 Apr,
2011

1

4

4

4

7

Claire, Elsmore, Bob and Michelle Jamieson

Effect of gypsum, potassium and nitrogen on pasture production

6 May,
2011

1

5

5

6

10

Weegowrie, Inverell, David and Alex Mason

Manure on forages

15 Sep, 2011

1

3

0

3

6

McMaster Field Day

5 topics including compaction, pasture-crop transitions and legume varieties

22 Sep, 2011

5

16

14

20

35

Nullamanna, Inverell, Peter Lane

Phosphorus and sulphur on legumes

25 Oct, 2011

1

9

7

7

14

Forest Hill, Inverell, Neil Kauter

Using Coolatai Grass

27 Oct, 2011

1

14

10

10

20

Utah, Delungra,
David La Fontaine

Soil nutrition specifically magnesium

22 Mar 2012

3

10

9

10

19

Delungra Forum

What is an ideal farming system for the Delungra area?

30 Mar 2012

1

12

9

8

20

TOTAL

   

15

77

62

72

138


Also the first three field days in 2011 did have fewer likert questions, and relied more on qualitative responses. The survey was modified from June 2011 and data reported accounts for the change in survey design.

Study Area and Area of Field day Impact

The BR-G CMA services the entire Gwydir Catchment (approx 26,500km2) and the NSW portion of the Border Rivers Catchment (approx 24,000km2). Both of these catchments are located within the Murray-Darling Basin, in south-eastern Australia. They are bounded by the Queensland border in the north and west, the Great Dividing Range in the east, and the Namoi Catchment in the south (Figure 1). The area covered by the field days approximated 59 182 hectares of farming land, and the percentage of cropped land varied on average was 31% (10-50%) and the percentage used for grazing averaging 81% and varied from 67 to 100%. Hence there is a dominance of graziers attending our field days. The areas of interest for future field days farmers indicated mostly soil issues (66%, n=72) which included soil fertility, nutrient management, soil Carbon and land capability, pasture (52%, n=72), and pasture-crop transitions (25%, n=72).

Figure 1. Location of the field day and on-farm experimentation as part of Grain and Graze II in Northern region of New South Wales and specifically within the priority sub-catchments of the Border Rivers-Gwydir Catchment Management Authority.

Results

The analysis is examining the combined data collected from 8 field days (about on-farm research) and 1 forum with a total of 138 participants (57% farmers, 11% agribusiness, 12% researchers, 17% NRM and 2% other) to examine if they are achieving the goals of the Grain and Graze II programme, and developing networks in priority sub-catchments that have a legacy beyond the research funding period. The composition of field day attendance also reflects that there is a genuine ‘space’ where farmers, scientists and agronomists can interact and debate the merits of On-farm research (OFR) and FSR. The Grain and Graze II project was also wanting to highlight the areas of risk and uncertainty as identified by farmers and what they perceive are the difficulties in implementing the practices demonstrated in the field days or discussed at the forum and as a counterpoint how willing they were to try some of the practices demonstrated at the field days. When asked why they attended the field day; 84% said the “topic”, 51% said “location”, 10% said “social opportunity”, and 13% said “other” (n=72). Our survey respondents confirm a recent national survey of farm managers that highlights 57% of respondents attend field days and 34% attend training courses or workshops for land management practice advice (Ecker et al. 2011). The entry survey is a useful way of examining what segment of the farming community we were attracting to these activities and how they learnt of the event. From our entry survey the majority of farmers attending are over 50 yrs old (52%, n=62), which closely aligns with the average age from the ARMS 2009-10 of 55 yrs old for the BR-G CMA (ABS, 2011). The majority of the attendees had heard of the field days through the post (45%), and very few had learnt of the event through the internet (6%). This seemingly low use of the internet contrasts with the ARMS 2009-10 which reported 38% of farmers in the BR-G CMA used the internet for information and advice, but the question did not allow elaboration on specific use (ABS 2011). When farmers were asked how they would like to receive information for future Grain and Graze II events there was a much higher preference for email (57%) or mail (40%), with very few farmers indicating telephone (11%) or fax (3%). Table 2 summarises the four key questions targeted by the evaluation survey from the past field days and forum, which had good response rates using a modified survey design that allowed better quantitative examination of the evaluation questions. In brief there was strong agreement with questions 1 to 4 (Table 2). Where the results did not suggest a strong agreement with the question, farmers who responded this way indicated the field day was “re-affirming” their current management or understanding so they felt it had little impact in relation to question two, three or four. Most suggested they are already making “good progress” and “I basically know where I should be going - gained more information to help”. The potential for these days to provide a “space” for discussion and interaction was confirmed by a number of farmers who commented in their survey along the lines of:

great discussion environment,
Locally based studies very pertinent to our style/methods of farming, hard to find such targeted information anywhere else,
because it is very informative and it provides the opportunity to discuss issues with people who know solutions,
a good way to exchange ideas, and keep up with new developments,
it was interesting and allowed everyone to talk and give their opinion,
good to get such great local knowledge appropriate to our climate and soil,
exchange of expertise with locals,
good learning environment,
the best part was being able to see theories in action and hear speakers explaining their trials,
conversation with the other farmers very informative

Table 2. Likert responses to the 4 key evaluation questions from Grain and Graze II field days and forum in 2011-2012 (n=72).

Field day /Forum

Q1. Did the event achieve its objectives? (rate from 1 to 5)

Q2. Was the event useful for participants? (rate from 1 to 5)

Q3. Did it contain new information?
(rate from 1 to 5)

Q4. Likelihood of
implementation
and potential for practice change (rate from 1 to 5)

Weegowrie, Inverell

4.1

4.0

3.7

4.7

Weegowrie, Elsmore and Gravesend Field days (n=3)


3.7


4.1


4.0


4.0

McMaster, Warialda

4.1

3.6

4.4

3.1

Nullamanna, Inverell

4.5

4.2

4.0

4.0

Forest Hill, Inverell

4.0

4.1

4.1

4.7

Utah, Delungra

4.3

4.0

3.4

3.9

Delungra Forum

4.4

4.1

4.1

4.5

TOTAL

4.16

4.01

3.96

4.13


The forum on farming systems asked participants whether it caused them to question their current thinking on what an ideal farming system is for the Delungra area, on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 indicating a high agreement with the statement, and on average they were 3.8. So for the most part the audience did question what is an ideal farming system for the area? The areas of the farming system they questioned their management of the most was undoubtedly first soil and fertility management followed very closely by pasture and its management through grazing practice. Inevitably the two - soils and pasture - were mentioned in tandem, and were never unhinged but coupled in their responses to this question. When asked what part of the farming system are you now more appreciative of than you were before attending the forum, most responded with soil fertility or soil nutrients, and are more determined to undertake soil testing to know what limits their plant growth. In terms of how confident they feel in adapting farming systems research to their own farm the forum participants were equally divided between those who thought it could be done and those who thought it was not easy to adapt research findings to their circumstances – their soils are “unique”. Nevertheless after hearing the panel speak most forum attendees said they would implement the findings they had heard about at the forum to their own place. When asked specifically what particular part of the farming system do you feel most confident in changing forum participants usually responded with the soil fertility or more generally pasture and crop management. A few were more specific in what they may try such as undertaking pasture and winter cropping for the winter feed gap. Interestingly these are the same areas that they are now more appreciative of after attending the forum. Most of the forum attendees felt they had learnt something new and rated it as 4.1 out of 5. We can identify from the survey responses (Table 2) that those farmers who attend the field days find the experience very positive, and 96% (n=72) would recommend the field day to others. The success of a programme that seeks to use boundary organizations for the purpose of interaction, discussion and promoting practice and behavioural change needs to recognise that sustained effort over multiple occasions is required to gradually build trust and attendance numbers. Our own experience has recorded repeat attendance by individuals which is a sign that trust is being built, because as the farmers say once they are there the results are “obvious” and very rewarding.

Acknowledgements.

I would like to acknowledge the project team of Dr Chris Guppy, Mr Bruce Gardiner, Ms Nicole Gammie and Mr Simon Jasper, the attendees of the field days and those farmers with OFR, as well as GRDC for the project funding.

References

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2011) Land Management and Farming in Australia 2009-10. Report 4627.0 ABS, Canberra.

Carr, A and Wilkinson, R (2005). Beyond Participation: Boundary Organization as a new space for farmers and scientists to interact, Society and Natural Resources, 18; 255-265.

Ecker S, Kankans R, Thompson L (2011) Drivers of practice change in land management in Australian agriculture: preliminary national survey. Issue 2.1 ABARES, Canberra, 1-9.

Previous PageTop Of PageNext Page