Designing better on-farm research in Australia using a participatory workshop process

There are renewed calls for end-user participation and the integration of local knowledge in agricultural research. In Australia, the response has included an increased emphasis on participatory on-farm research with farmers and commercial agronomists that tests accepted principals to answer practical local farming questions. However, this pursuit of greater relevance has often led to compromises in research designs, unclear results and frustration amongst farmers, commercial agronomists and Research Development and Extension (RDE) agency researchers. This paper reports on a series of pre-season planning workshops from `Doing successful on-farm research', a workshop-based initiative that provides guidelines and a series of interactive activities to plan better participatory on-farm research. The workshop approach helps people design on-farm research that is appropriate to their own needs and local conditions. It assists them to clearly identify their issues, develop specific research questions and decide the best approach to answer those questions with the appropriate rigour for their own situations. These `Doing successful on-farm research' workshops address four potential deficiencies in on-farm research and farming systems RDE more generally in Australia: (1) variable participation of scientists and farmers in on-farm research; (2) the lack of clear guidelines for effective participatory practice and on-farm research; (3) limited support for on-farm research beyond the intensive investigations conducted by RDE agencies and (4) limited support for industry and farmers to contextualise information and research outcomes for specific individual circumstances and faster adaptation of technology. This may be a valuable contribution to balancing the demands for both relevance and rigour in on-farm research in Australia. In "Ground–breaking Stuff’- Proceedings of the 13th Australian Society of Agronomy Conference, 10-14 September 2006, Perth, Western Australia.

Analysing industry needs to fine tune IPM project activities

As a first step to better targeting the activities of a project for improving management of western flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentialis, (WFT) in field grown vegetable crops, we surveyed growers, consultants and other agribusiness personnel in two regions of Queensland. Using face-to-face interviews, we collected data on key pests and measures used to manage them, the importance of WFT and associated viral diseases, sources of pest management information and additional skills and knowledge needed by growers and industry. Responses were similar in the two regions. While capsicum growers in one northern Queensland district had suffered serious losses from WFT damage in 2002, in general the pest was not seen as a major problem. In cucurbit crops, the silverleaf whitefly (Bemisia tabaci biotype B) was considered the most difficult insect pest to manage. Pest control tactics were largely based on pesticides although many respondents mentioned non-chemical methods such as good farm hygiene practices, control of weed hosts and regular crop monitoring, particularly when prompted. Respondents wanted to know more about pest identification, biology and damage, spray application and the best use of insecticides. Natural enemies were mentioned infrequently. Keeping up to date with available pesticide options, availability of new chemicals and options for a district-wide approach to managing pests emerged as key issues. Growers identified agricultural distributors, consultants, Queensland Department of Primary Industries staff, other growers and their own experience as important sources of information. Field days, workshops and seminars did not rank highly. Busy vegetable growers wanted these activities to be short and relevant, and preferred to be contacted by post and facsimile rather than email. In response to these results, we are focusing on three core, interrelated project extension strategies: (i) short workshops, seminars and farm walks to provide opportunities for discussion, training and information sharing with growers and their agribusiness advisors; (ii) communication via newsletters and information leaflets; (iii) support for commercialisation of services.

Pitfalls and benefits of involving industry in fisheries research: A case study of the live reef fish industry in Queensland, Australia

Including collaboration with industry members as an integral part of research activities is a relatively new approach to fisheries research. Earlier approaches to involving fishers in research usually involved compulsory accommodations of research, such as through compulsory observer programs, in which fishers were seen as subjects of rather than participants in research. This new approach brings with it significant potential benefits but also some unique issues both for the researchers and the participating industry members. In this paper we describe a research project involving the Queensland Coral Reef Finfish Fishery that originated from industry and community concerns about changes in marketing practices in an established commercial line fishery. A key aspect of this project was industry collaboration in all stages of the research, from formulation of objectives to assistance with interpretation of results. We discuss this research as a case study of some of the issues raised by collaboration between industry and research groups in fisheries research and the potential pitfalls and benefits of such collaborations for all parties. A dedicated liaison and extension strategy was a key element in the project to develop and maintain the relationships between fishers and researchers that were fundamental to the success of the collaboration. A major research benefit of the approach was the provision of information not available from other sources: 300 days of direct and unimpeded observation of commercial fishing by researchers; detailed catch and effort records from a further 126 fishing trips; and 53 interviews completed with fishers. Fishers also provided extensive operational information about the fishery as well as ongoing support for subsequent research projects. The time and resources required to complete the research in this consultative framework were greater than for more traditional, researcher-centric fisheries research, but the benefits gained far outweighed the costs.