Technical and Social Dimensions of Farmer Learning: An Analysis of the Emergence of Reduced Tillage Systems in England

Reduced tillage systems potentially provide both environmental and economic benefits. However, the system is not universally applicable and requires a higher standard of overall management than ploughing, the conventional form of tillage, particularly with respect to maintenance of yield and soil structure, straw and stubble treatment, grass weed and slug control. As such reduced tillage systems are non-prescriptive and require new ways of learning compared to more simple conventional techniques. This article examines the technical and social dimensions of such learning through a study of farmers practicing reduced tillage in England. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were carried out with 12 farmers implementing reduced tillage and four promoters associated with an initiative supporting them. The results show that a community of reduced tillage farmers, motivated by different interests, has been emerging in England. Individual farmers are learning at the farm level through experimentation and adaptation, and have used a variety of networking devices to take this learning and validate and reflect on it by interacting with others with the same experiences. The networks were also found to extend to researchers and some agronomists. Thus the individual activity of on-farm learning, the technical dimension, is accompanied and enhanced by a process of social learning, the social dimension. However, there are barriers to this social learning, which themselves are intimately connected with the technical complexities of the system. The results show that not all farmers are willing to share their experiences. The difficult nature of reduced tillage, and the high management standards needed to implement it well, has made some farmers reluctant to engage in networks due to fear of criticism from other farmers, desire to protect their new found knowledge from competitors, or poor regard for the standards of farmers new to the system

Agronomist–farmer knowledge encounters: an analysis of knowledge exchange in the context of best management practices in England

This paper explores how knowledge is exchanged between agricultural advisors and farmers in the context of sustainable farming practices in England. Specifically the paper examines the nature of the knowledge exchange at the encounters between one group of advisors, agronomists, and farmers. The promotion of best management practices, which are central to the implementation of sustainable agricultural policies in England, provide the empirical context for this study. The paper uses the notion of expert and facilitative approaches as a conceptual framework for analyzing knowledge exchange encounters between agronomists and farmers. Data were derived from semi-structured interviews with 31 agronomists and 17 farmers, in the context of three initiatives promoting a range of best management practices including (a) targeted use of nitrogen (N), (b) use of nutrients within manure, and (c) management practices to improve soil structure. The interviews revealed that, although many agronomist-farmer knowledge exchange encounters are characterized by an imbalance of power, distrust, and the divergence of knowledge, other encounters provide a platform for the facilitation of farmer learning in their transition to more sustainable practices

Agricultural advisers and the transition to sustainable soil managment in England: an analysis of the role of knowledge and knowledge processes

This research is concerned with the dynamic relationship between agricultural advisers, knowledge and soil in England. On the basis that agricultural advisers have always played a central role in linking research and farming practice and implementing policy on the farm, the thesis explores the role of the adviser in facilitating a shift towards sustainable soil management (which encompasses a range of complex and knowledge intensive practices) and to the realisation of policy objectives in this domain. Specifically it aims to provide detailed empirical evidence of the role that agricultural advisers play in the acquisition, utilisation, generation and transfer of knowledge about soil best management practice and to elicit the factors that enable and constrain these knowledge processes. Conceptually, the research draws on approaches to knowledge and knowledge processes in agriculture from the allied disciplines of rural geography, rural sociology and extension science. An actor-oriented Agricultural Knowledge and Information System (AKIS) approach provides the basis for examining adviser interactions with both the research and farming communities. While the AKIS describes the factors that enable and constrain how advisers engage in knowledge processes in terms of connections across institutional interfaces between research, advice and farming, an actororiented approach, which understands knowledge processes as social processes operating across social interfaces, enables exploration of how individual advisers behaving as autonomous agents resolve these constraining and enabling factors. The- study, combining quantitative and qualitative methods, employs an extensive postal questionnaire survey of a 163 agricultural advisers from across England and three detailed case studies where sustainable soil management is a central theme, namely: the Landcare Project; the UK Soil Management Initiative; and the SUNDIAL Fertiliser Recommendation System. The data describe an advisory community with a range of involvement, concerns and competence in soil management. Patterns of acquisition and utilisation of knowledge about soil best management practice revealed by the questionnaire data suggest that advisers are actively seeking and using knowledge about soil management, although some are more constrained than others in accessing it. These patterns, however, only provide a partial understanding of the complex knowledge processes in which advisers engage as they operate at the boundaries between science and practice. As such, qualitative data from the case studies are used to reveal that, in bridging the different institutional cultures and life worlds of research and practice, advisers encounter different understandings and expectations of soil best management practices. Rather than simply acquiring, utilising and transferring knowledge, the data reveal that advisers negotiate, adapt, transform, generate and integrate knowledge about soil as they struggle to reconcile the principles of research-based soil best management practice with the practical and business constraints of the farm. In doing this advisers, and agronomists in particular, tend to closely align themselves with the interests of the farming community and as such are more likely to reject or question soil best management practice. In addition the apparent lack of advisers' competence and skills in certain knowledge intensive soil best management practices and their reliance on experiential knowledge further explains their reluctance to engage in soil best management practices derived from national research. Integration of knowledge through dialogue and understanding emerges as key to overcoming these tensions and providing the basis for facilitating sustainable soil management. Advisers are shown to have a central role in integrating knowledge from research and from farmers. The processes and relationships that enable this integration are identified. The thesis concludes with some policy relevant suggestions to improve the effectiveness of advisers' participation in the transition to sustainable soil management in England. These include: exploiting a diverse and flexible advisory community; improving advisers' skills and expertise; instilling in them confidence to provide credible and practical soil best management practice; and improving the quality of communication between the advisers, researchers and farmers. Future research directions are reviewed in the context of the proposed implementation of Soil Management Plans on all farms in England as a component of cross compliance within CAP reforms

Niche knowledge systems-challenging or invigorating the AKS? An analysis of the Permaculture community in England

This paper examines how knowledge systems within alternative innovative agricultural groups (niches) develop and interact with the mainstream AKS using the notion of boundaries. It draws on empirical data from a study of the Permaculture community in England, a sub-niche entity. Members of this community question the operations of the mainstream agricultural regime and advocate a radical shift in patterns of thinking and action towards new agri-food systems. Analysis shows that a distinctive knowledge system has emerged to support learning in the community independently of the AKS. This is strongly associated with, and coheres around, the community’s social system. The boundary between this KS and the mainstream AKS can be characterised in terms of differing sets of beliefs and values, epistemologies, ways of facilitating and supporting learning, approaches to research and modes of development. However, despite these epistemic divides, there is evidence of some interaction across the boundary. The paper explores the potential for the Permaculture’s KS to potentially invigorate and transform the AKS

Deliverable 5.2 Overview of socio-economic influences on crop and soil management systems

This report examines results from Stakeholder Workshops, specifically looking at: • Typical cropping systems and rotations and the associated risks to soil carbon and implementation of soil carbon management practices • The barriers and the opportunities to implementation of cost effective soil carbon management practices (win-win) One workshop was conducted in each of six case study regions across Europe: Zealand, Denmark; Central Region, Hungary; Tuscany Region, Italy; Mazovia (Mazowieckie Voivodeship), Poland; East Coast, Scotland; and Andalucía, Spain. Participants included: agricultural advisors (from public extension and commercial services), farmer representatives, leading farmers and policy makers. These workshops follow a preliminary consultation involving interviews undertaken in 2013 and will be followed by a further set of Stakeholder Workshops in 2015. Each activity builds on analysis from the last and the results are fed back to other project WPs in an iterative process which is the core of the SmartSOIL methodology. Five sets of management practices: planting catch (cover) crops, crop rotations, residue management, reduced tillage operations, and fertilizer and manure management provided the basis for discussion in the workshops. They were previously identified as having the potential to increase soil carbon stocks and are referred to ‘soil carbon management practices’. Preliminary analysis of the cost effectiveness of the soil carbon management practices was undertaken in each case study to provide an assessment of the methods that offer SOC most cost-effectively (win-win practices). This was done using Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) methodology. MACC figures were presented to participants in the workshops to frame the discussion around barriers and opportunities for implementation of win-win practices

Deliverable 5.2 Overview of socio-economic influences on crop and soil management systems

This report examines results from Stakeholder Workshops, specifically looking at: • Typical cropping systems and rotations and the associated risks to soil carbon and implementation of soil carbon management practices • The barriers and the opportunities to implementation of cost effective soil carbon management practices (win-win) One workshop was conducted in each of six case study regions across Europe: Zealand, Denmark; Central Region, Hungary; Tuscany Region, Italy; Mazovia (Mazowieckie Voivodeship), Poland; East Coast, Scotland; and Andalucía, Spain. Participants included: agricultural advisors (from public extension and commercial services), farmer representatives, leading farmers and policy makers. These workshops follow a preliminary consultation involving interviews undertaken in 2013 and will be followed by a further set of Stakeholder Workshops in 2015. Each activity builds on analysis from the last and the results are fed back to other project WPs in an iterative process which is the core of the SmartSOIL methodology. Five sets of management practices: planting catch (cover) crops, crop rotations, residue management, reduced tillage operations, and fertilizer and manure management provided the basis for discussion in the workshops. They were previously identified as having the potential to increase soil carbon stocks and are referred to ‘soil carbon management practices’. Preliminary analysis of the cost effectiveness of the soil carbon management practices was undertaken in each case study to provide an assessment of the methods that offer SOC most cost-effectively (win-win practices). This was done using Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) methodology. MACC figures were presented to participants in the workshops to frame the discussion around barriers and opportunities for implementation of win-win practices

Niche knowledge systems-challenging or invigorating the AKS? An analysis of the Permaculture community in England

This paper examines how knowledge systems within alternative innovative agricultural groups (niches) develop and interact with the mainstream AKS using the notion of boundaries. It draws on empirical data from a study of the Permaculture community in England, a sub-niche entity. Members of this community question the operations of the mainstream agricultural regime and advocate a radical shift in patterns of thinking and action towards new agri-food systems. Analysis shows that a distinctive knowledge system has emerged to support learning in the community independently of the AKS. This is strongly associated with, and coheres around, the community’s social system. The boundary between this KS and the mainstream AKS can be characterised in terms of differing sets of beliefs and values, epistemologies, ways of facilitating and supporting learning, approaches to research and modes of development. However, despite these epistemic divides, there is evidence of some interaction across the boundary. The paper explores the potential for the Permaculture’s KS to potentially invigorate and transform the AKS

Matching new entrants and retiring farmers through farm joint ventures: Insights from the Fresh Start Initiative in Cornwall, UK

Concerns about the sustainability of an ageing farming population have brought interest in so called entry-exit issues in policy circles. Policy interventions to date have offered limited scope in stimulating farm transfer in UK, however, the increase in unconventional tenures which include partnerships, share farming and contract farming (collectively called joint ventures) would appear to offer new opportunities for those wishing to enter or leave farming. In recognition of this the Fresh Start initiative in Cornwall set up a matchmaking element with the aim of identifying and facilitating potential joint ventures agreements between new entrants and older farmers. The emphasis was on setting up long-term arrangements that would enable the new entrant to 'buy into' an existing farm business, gradually taking over managerial control. This paper examines the processes of matching partners for the possible formation of farm joint ventures, using qualitative data derived from interviews with the participants, deliverers and stakeholders involved in the matchmaking element of this initiative. The results reveal that there is a deep rooted reluctance amongst participants in the initiative to enter formal long term joint ventures due to differing motivations, expectations, and concerns about their respective responsibilities in the working relationship and about the validity of the legal framework. Only where a relationship had already been informally established was there a commitment to formalise a joint venture agreement. Future emphasis in policy should therefore be on helping to facilitate and formalise existing partnerships, rather than trying to artificially orchestrate matches where the parties do not know each other

Agricultural transition: Niche and regime knowledge systems’ boundary dynamics

This paper examines how knowledge systems within alternative agricultural niche develop and interact with the regime’s Agricultural Knowledge Systems (AKS). It frames the analysis around transition, knowledge systems and boundaries literatures. Specifically it explores the extent to which niche knowledge systems confront and, or enhance the regime’s AKS. The paper draws on empirical data from a study of the Permaculture community in England. The analysis describes the boundary between the knowledge systems of the Permaculture niche and the mainstream agricultural regime. Rather than a simple notion of PKS confronting or enhancing the AKS there are multiple knowledge processes operating which both maintain and permeate boundaries between the two knowledge systems