Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:51:32.279Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Participatory Research and Extension Strategies for Sustainable Agricultural Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jerry D. Doll  and
Charles A. Francis
Jerry D. Doll
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Wis., Madison, WI 53706
Charles A. Francis
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Nebr., Lincoln, NE 68583
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Conventional strategies for developing component technologies are being challenged by the complexities of today's agricultural environment. The needs for support of adaptive research, for sufficient field sites to evaluate location specificity of technologies, and for testing components as parts of total farm systems are not easily met within the confines of the experiment station. On-farm research strategies involve the farmer and rancher in project design, field implementation, collection and evaluation of data, and interpretation of results. Farmer presentations in extension meetings and field tours involve these cooperators in the demonstration and technology sharing process. Farmers in Nebraska and Wisconsin have applied this process to research nitrogen levels in continuous and rotated cereals, the use of allelopathic chemicals from rye (Secale cereale L.) to reduce herbicide costs in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] production, on other alternative weed management strategies, and strip cropping to reduce soil erosion and meet government program compliance requirements. Useful in a wide range of ecological and economic circumstances, participatory methods using farming systems research and extension strategies have global applications.

Keywords

Cropping systemson-farm researchweed management
Type
Symposium
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , June 1992 , pp. 473 - 482
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Barnes, J. P., and Putnam, A. R. 1983. Rye residues contribute to weed suppression in no-tillage cropping systems. J. Chem. Ecol. 9:1045–1057.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Bauer, T. L., and Doll, J. D. 1990. Use of allelopathic and mulch properties of rye to control weeds in soybeans. Am. Soc. Agron. Annual Meetings, San Antonio, Texas. Agron. Abstr. p. 136.Google Scholar
3. Bauer, T. L. 1991. Use of the allelopathic and mulch properties of rye as a method of weed control in soybean. MS. Thesis. Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison. 105 p.Google Scholar
4. Berry, W. 1987. Whose head is the farmer using? Whose head is using the farmer? in Jackson, W., Berry, W., and Coleman, B., eds. Meeting the Expectations of the Land. North Point Press, San Francisco.Google Scholar
5. Binning, L. K., Wyman, J. A., Schmidt, K. P., Shepard, R. L., and Duffy, K. M. 1991. The economics of on-farm demonstrations. Proc. Fert., Ag. Lime Pest Manage. Conf. 30:188–189.Google Scholar
6. Chambers, R., Pacey, A., and Thrupp, L. A. 1989. Fanner First: Farmer Innovation and Agricultural Research. Intermediate Technol. Publ., London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Coble, H. D. 1985. The development and implementation of economic thresholds for soybeans. p. 295–307 in Frisbie, R. E., and Adkisson, P. L., eds. Integrated Pest Management in Major Agricultural Systems. Texas A&M Univ. Press., College Station, Texas.Google Scholar
8. Doll, J. D., Doersch, R. E., Proost, R., and Mulder, T. 1990. Weed management with reduced herbicide use and reduced tillage. Proc. Wis. Dep. Agric. Sustain. Agric. Conf. p. 7–16.Google Scholar
9. Edwards, C. A. 1988. The concept of integrated systems in lower input/sustainable agriculture, p. 39–41 in Francis, C. A., and King, J. W., eds. Sustainable Agriculture in the Midwest Proc. North Cent Regional Conf., Univ. Nebraska Agric. Res. Div. and Coop. Ext., Lincoln.Google Scholar
10. Exner, D., Thompson, R., and Thompson, S. 1990. Case study: a resource-efficient farm with livestock, p. 263–280 in Francis, C. A., Flora, C. B., and King, L. D., eds. Sustainable Agriculture in Temperate Zones. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
11. Francis, C. A., ed. 1986. Multiple Cropping Systems. Macmillan Publ. Co., New York. 383 p.Google Scholar
12. Francis, C. A., and Youngberg, G. 1990. Sustainable agriculture–an overview. p. 1–23 in Francis, C. A., Flora, C. B., and King, L. D., eds. Sustainable Agriculture in Temperate Zones. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
13. Francis, C. A., King, J., DeWitt, J., Bushnell, J., and Lucas, L. 1990. Participatory strategies for information exchange. Am. J. Alt. Agric. 5:153–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Gliessman, S. R. 1986. Plant interactions in multiple cropping systems. p. 82–95 in Francis, C. A., ed., Multiple Cropping Systems. Macmillan Publ. Co., New York.Google Scholar
15. Harvey, R. G., and Wagner, C. R. 1991. Predicting future weed pressure in row crops. Proc. Fert., Ag Lime Pest Manage. Conf. 30:219.Google Scholar
16. Harwood, R. R. 1990. A history of sustainable agriculture. p. 3–19 in Edwards, C. A., Lal, R., Madden, P., Miller, R. H., and House, G., eds. Sustainable Agricultural Systems. Soil Water Conserv. Soc., Ankeny, Iowa.Google Scholar
17. Hicks, D. R., and Peterson, R. H. 1981. Effect of corn variety and soybean rotation on corn yield. Proc. 36m Annu. Corn Sorghum Res. Conf., Am. Seed Trade Assoc., Washington, D.C. 36:84–93.Google Scholar
18. Hildebrand, P. E., and Poey, F. 1983. On-Farm Agronomic Trials in Farming Systems Research and Extension. Lynn Rienner Publ. Inc., Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
19. King, R. P., Lybecker, D. W., Schweizer, E. E., and Zimdahl, R. L. 1986. Bioeconomic modeling to simulate weed control strategies for continuous corn. (Zea mays L.). Weed Sci 34:972–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Lockeretz, W. 1987. Establishing the proper role for on-farm research. Am. J. Alt Agric. 2:132–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Meisinger, J. J., Shipley, P. R., and Decker, A. M. 1990. Winter cover crops to retain N within soil-crop systems and reduce nitrate leaching. Am. Soc. Agron. Abstr. p. 152.Google Scholar
22. Rhoades, R. 1989. The role of farmers in the creation of agricultural technology. Ch. 1.1 in Farmers First Farmer Innovation and Agricultural Research, Chambers, R., Pacey, A., and Thrupp, L. A., eds. Intermediate Technol. Publ., London. p. 3–9.Google Scholar
23. Schweizer, E. E., and Lybecker, D. W. 1990. Weed management decisions in corn based on bioeconomic modeling. Weed Sci Soc. Am. Abstr. No. 21.Google Scholar
24. Shilling, D. G., Liebl, R. A., and Worsham, D. A. 1985. Rye (Secale cereale L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) mulch: The suppression of certain broad leaved weeds and the isolation and identification of phytotoxins. p. 243–271 in The Chemistry of Allelopathy. Am. Chem. Soc. Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Taylor, D. C. 1990. On-farm sustainable agriculture research: lessons from the past, directions for the future. J. Sustain. Agric. 1:43–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Thurston, H. D. 1990. Plant disease management practices of traditional farmers. Plant Dis. 74:96–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Vietor, D. M., Cralle, H. T., and Chandler, M. 1992. Science, technology, and systems: A hierarchy of inquiry. Weed Technol. 6:452–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Walters, D. T., Mortensen, D. A., Francis, C. A., Elmore, R. W., and King, J. W. 1990. Specificity: the context of research for sustainability. J. Soil Water Conserv. 45:55–57.Google Scholar
29. Westra, P., Lybecker, D. W., and Schweizer, E. E. 1990. Farm level testing of a computer bioeconomic model for weed/corn management. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. No. 128.Google Scholar