Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: KerryByrnes4 Document Number: D01558
Notes:
Kerry J. Byrnes Collection, USDA/FAS/OCID/IIP, Rural Development Division, Office of Development Resources. United States Agency for International Development, Washington, DC.22 pages.
search through journal, Many farmers view with skepticism the dominant agricultural research and extension education model, in which knowledge on farming practices is developed by researchers and delivered through extension programs. The participatory research and education model is designed to support a shared vision of research and education as a learning process among partners working in community. The participatory model is offered as a way to achieve better communication and enhanced cooperation among farmers, researchers and extension educators. (original)
Batie, Sandra S. (author), Swinton, Scott M. (author), and Food and Agricultural Policy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI; Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1994
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 97 Document Number: C08024
search through journal, Sustainable agricultural research and education have gained acceptability within the land-grant system, but they still must be fully integrated into its fabric. Challenges remain in three key areas: knowledge generation, research and education, and funding. New biological and ecological knowledge is needed on plant-animal-human-environment interactions from the microbial level on upward to that we can move beyond anecdotal evidence of biological integration efficiencies to scientific understanding of the underlying processes and opportunities for human intervention. Socioeconomic research must address human motivations to change farming methods and the likely impacts of these changes on farmers, consumers, other species, and the quality of the environment. Generating this knowledge will affect the integration of research and education. Having farmers set the research and outreach agenda dissolves the old distinction between research and extension. This situation is complicated by budgetary stress and uncertainty about the dividing line between public and private responsibilities. The funding of sustainable agriculture creates a dilemma. Earmarked funding has helped legitimize sustainable agriculture in the land-grant university, but if it fails to become integrated into the routine land-grant research and education agenda, it will lose its newly gained momentum in the event those funds disappear. (original)
Butler, Lorna Michael (author), Murray, Helene (author), and Murray: Coordinator, Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN; Butler: Extension Anthropologist, Washington State University, Puyallup, WA
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1994
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 97 Document Number: C08026
search through journal, Research and extension personnel are beginning to look for new strategies to involve more farmers and the non-farm public in their programs. Two approaches we have used are whole farm case studies (WFCS) and focus groups. WFCS in Oregon and Washington led to several research and educational programming ideas that are currently being pursued in both states. A focus group to study water quality, nitrate leaching and farming practices in Skagit County, Washington is one outcome of the WFCS process. It is made up of 16 people, including farmers, university personnel, members of environmental groups, and government representatives. We review these two complementary participatory strategies for systems-oriented sustainable agriculture research and education programs. Both have been very useful for building problem-solving partnerships between the land-grant universities and agricultural and environmental constituents in our area. Noteworthy outcomes include: complementary applied on-farm and experiment station research; farming systems analysis; public education; new linkages with environmental and agricultural interest groups; additional grant funds to address identifies priority issues; and interdisciplinary teams that cut across the biological and social sciences and include diverse citizen representation. (original)
