Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
but are also less profitable. The participants generally agreed on the importance of going
towards ecological practices, but there were different opinions about which crop rotations
should be categorised as intensive or extensive in the framework (Figure 17.2).
Additionally, the social or vertical dimension was mostly understood as farmer cooperation
in marketing. Farms placed in the lower half had farmers unwilling to cooperate with other
farmers in marketing their produce. Although Farm 1 was considered ecologically sound, there
was some uncertainty regarding whether it belonged in the upper or lower quadrant on the right
side of the model because several farmer-participants felt this farmer 'only listened to himself '.
Before the workshops, our impression was that orientation to customers would be an essen-
tial learning challenge for organic vegetable farmers. In contrast, the group brought forth rela-
tionships with other farmers in marketing and participation in farmers' marketing cooperatives
as the key issues. The main challenge for this group was not customer orientation, but forming
a unified group of organic vegetable farmers to work together on negotiations with customers,
especially with the big wholesale markets. This indicated a desire to strengthen the commu-
nity of organic vegetable farmers.
From our perspective today, the workshops were successful in illustrating and integrating
several factors that are most often discussed in isolation, such as how natural resource use may
be linked with farmers' social relations. It was important to discuss together the heterogeneity
of crop rotations. In organic vegetable farming in Finland and probably also elsewhere, farmers
do have a choice for intensifying their production and this option, together with the more
diversity-supporting practices, should be considered and discussed in farmer training. Vision-
ary learning tools may help farmers critically ref lect and evaluate on different alternatives.
The case study farms were essential to make the tool understandable. The model was open
and abstract enough so that the farmers could modify and use it for their own purposes. Still
it was not totally the farmers' construction because the form and general dimensions were
given. Use of the tool serves as an example of knowledge creation (Hakkarainen
et
al
. 2004).
The researcher's abstract model, concrete examples of case study farms and the needs of the
participating farmers together produced new knowledge. However, whether this use of a
learning tool as knowledge creation led to transformations in on-farm practices or in farmers'
networking remains an open question. Knowledge-creation processes often require lengthy
time periods. Not only farming practices but also farmers' social relations are often reshaped
in knowledge-creation processes.
Networking in organising educational actiities (Norway, USA)
There is a wide range of examples of how networking has been achieved by farmers, with and
without the participation of government agencies and private advisers. Although not all dedi-
cated to organic farms and farmers, these networks are descried as examples of how farmer-
generated ideas have reached wide audiences in several places in the world.
Farmer ariety testing circles in Norway
Since early in the history of plant improvement at the Agricultural University of Norway
(NLH), there have been farmer circles in cereal-producing regions that took on responsibility
for the final testing of new cultivars under commercial conditions. Often advised by the public
sector plant breeders or by members who were themselves crop consultants, these circles
increased seed and planted modest-sized commercial fields of promising new varieties. Prima-
rily for their own benefit, but also for other cereal growers throughout the country, these
farmers reported their results based on highly practical tests under the conditions of their
current farming systems. This system continues today as a highly effective, grassroots method
