In modern agriculture, weed problems are predicted to worsen and become more complicated as a result of increasing invasiveness, herbicide resistance, and emphasis on high-input methods. Weeds cause huge economic yield losses that range from US$100 million to US$26 billion globally. The knowledge of weed science has offered success in the past through effective, reasonably priced, and secure technologies; specifically, synthetic herbicides to effectively control weeds in agroecosystems. Weed science is accepted and adopted by many universities with teaching, research, and/or extension programs in agriculture. Globally, approximately 7% of all the universities offering agricultural education have dedicated weed science departments focusing on weed biology, ecology, and management. Some universities also offer weed science degree programs or at least certain courses in their degrees related to associated disciplines, such as plant protection, agronomy, and ecology. Although substantial advances have been made in weed science, such as a separate weed science discipline, specialized journals, and specific weed science societies and conferences worldwide, many constraints (e.g., lack of trained weed scientists) and barriers to adoption of new weed science technologies remain. Slow modernization in weed science research and low funding has slowed the progress of this discipline. New curricula in the weed science discipline should focus on the role of biochemistry, evolutionary biology, molecular biology, and genetics in weed science research.

This article examines the dissemination of agricultural education in primary schools in the Romagna, an important rural area in post-unification Italy. The topic is explored within a wider perspective, analysing the impact of institutional changes – at both the national and local levels – on the transmission of agricultural knowledge in primary education during the final quarter of the nineteenth century. Two particular elements of the process are examined: students, as the intended beneficiaries of the educational process; and teachers, who as well as having a key role in reducing the extent of illiteracy were sometimes also involved in disseminating agricultural knowledge. The transfer of that knowledge appears to have been a very challenging task, not least because of the scant interest that Italy's ruling class showed towards this issue. However, increasing importance seems to have been given to agricultural education in primary schools during the economic crisis of the 1880s, when the expansion of this provision was thought to be among the factors that might help to prepare the ground for the hoped-for ‘agricultural revolution’.

Experts have long sought to understand the factors that underlie farmer decision making for weed management. The majority of this interest has been in relation to the weak adoption of integrated management approaches and more recently, herbicide resistance strategies. In order to increase adoption in these contexts there is a need to understand better the underlying drivers for weed management decisions. The objective of the research reported here was to probe farmers' understanding of weed management to establish a baseline understanding of these key drivers. Thirty Ohio farmers participated in an in-depth interview where they were asked to reflect on how weeds are introduced and spread, what risks and benefits weeds pose, and what management strategies farmers are familiar with and which they prefer. Their responses were mapped, coded, and analyzed for dominant beliefs and major decision-making influences. The results indicate that farmers largely attribute the introduction and movement of weeds to factors outside their control (e.g., the environment, plant characteristics). They frequently cite diverse and integrated management, but their focus is on control as opposed to prevention. In general, they tend to receive messages about integrated and preventive approaches, but do not always put them into practice because of underlying beliefs about the inevitability of new weed introductions and spread.

As concern about the long-term viability of our food and fiber system has grown, many agricultural research administrators, prominent scientists and policymakers have focused increasing attention on the important research and educational needs in sustainable agriculture. Colleges of agriculture should be important in meeting the challenges of sustainable agriculture; a central question is whether they are adequate for the task. This paper highlights several individual and institutional constraints that limit the ability of these colleges to address the needs: 1) assumptions and biases regarding the relationship between humans and nature, and the concept of progress; 2) the demographic characteristics, education, and experience of research scientists; 3) the specialized departmental organization of research institutions; 4) imbalances among analyses on the molecular, cell, organism and ecosystem levels; 5) emphasis on farm level analysis and technology development; 6) new agricultural biotechnologies that may overemphasize short-term, narrow technical considerations and proprietary products; 7) compartmentalization of education by discipline, and the limited informal and field experiences for students; 8) the background and education of current Extension Service agents; 9) the emphasis on economic effects in research impact assessments, to the neglect of environmental effects and social consequences for farmers, rural communities and society at large; 10) limited capability for comprehensive public policy analysis.

Despite these limitations, new research agendas and college programs are effectively addressing many needs of sustainable agriculture systems. To be more successful, these efforts must be broad-based and sensitive to a wide range of issues, and must include all participants in the system.

Agroecology is the development and application of ecological theory to the management of agricultural systems, according to the specific land and other resources available. Beyond the biological and climatic dimensions of agriculture and ecology, there is growing appreciation of the influence of social, economic, and political factors on the structure and success of farming systems. This broader field is becoming known as “agroecology and sustainable development.” Expansion of the conventional curriculum to include integrative themes is essential because of the need for students to appreciate a whole farm focus for analysis, to understand the impact of socio-economic factors, and to further develop their abilities to link people and environment. Two courses are proposed and described in detail “Biology of Agroecosystems” includes study of system structure and function, cycles and interactions among components, system development and performance, and the importance of resource conservation and use. “Agroecology and Sustainable Agricultural Development” includes a survey of systems around the world, an evaluation of resources and their use, the environmental impact of agriculture, the relationships between society and agriculture, the applications of agroecology to rural development, and some projections of alternative future strategies for food production. Future agricultural professionals need to understand how improvement of agroecosystems is closely linked to economic, cultural, and political systems, and how they are both enhanced and constrained by factors beyond biology and climate.