Social Learning Processes in Swiss Soil Protection? The 'From Farmer - To Farmer' Project

Social learning approaches have become a prominent focus in studies related to sustainable agriculture. In order to better understand the potential of social learning for more sustainable development, the present study assessed the processes, effects and facilitating elements of interaction related to social learning in the context of Swiss soil protection and the innovative ‘From Farmer - To Farmer’ project. The study reveals that social learning contributes to fundamental transformations of patterns of interactions. However, the study also demonstrates that a learning-oriented understanding of sustainable development implies including analysis of the institutional environments in which the organizations of the individual representatives of face-to-face-based social learning processes are operating. This has shown to be a decisive element when face-to-face-based learning processes of the organisations’ representatives are translated into organisational learning. Moreover, the study revealed that this was achieved not directly through formalisation of new lines of institutionalised cooperation but by establishing links in a ‘boundary space’ trying out new forms of collaboration, aiming at social learning and co-production of knowledge. It is argued that further research on social learning processes should give greater emphasis to this intermediary level of ‘boundary spaces’.

Soil conservation in Swiss agriculture - Approaching abstract and symbolic meanings in farmers' life-worlds

This paper explores the significance of ‘life-worlds’ for better understanding why farmers adopt or reject soil conservation measures and for identifying basic dimensions to be covered by social learning processes in Swiss agricultural soil protection. The study showed that farmers interpret soil erosion and soil conservation measures against the background of their entire life-world. By doing so, farmers consider abstract and symbolic meanings of soil conservation. This is, soil conservation measures have to be feasible and practical in the everyday farming routine, however, they also have to correspond with their aesthetic perception, their value system and their personal and professional identities. Consequently, by switching to soil conservation measures such as no-tillage farmers have to adapt not only the routines of their daily farming life, but also their perception of the aesthetics of cultivated land, underlying values and images of themselves. Major differences between farmers who adopt and farmers who reject no-tillage were found to depend on the degree of coherence they could create between the abstract and symbolic meanings of the soil conservation measure. From this perspective, implementation of soil protection measures faces the challenge of facilitating interactions between farmers, experts and scientists at a ‘deeper’ level, with an awareness of all significant dimensions that characterise the life-world. The paper argues that a certain level of shared symbolic meaning is essential to achieving mutual understanding in social learning processes.

Erosion Damage Mapping: Assessing Current Soil Erosion Damage in Switzerland

Within the scope of a comprehensive assessment of the degree of soil erosion in Switzerland, common methods have been used in the past including test plot measurements, artificial rainfall simulation, and erosion modelling. In addition, mapping guidelines for all visible erosion features have been developed since the 1970s and are being successfully applied in many research and soil conservation projects. Erosion damage has been continuously mapped over a period of 9 years in a test region in the central Bernese plateau. In 2005, two additional study areas were added. The present paper assesses the data gathered and provides a comparison of the three study areas within a period of one year (from October 2005 to October 2006), focusing on the on-site impacts of soil erosion. During this period, about 11 erosive rainfall events occurred. Average soil loss rates mapped at each study site amounted to 0.7 t ha-1, 1.2 t ha-1 and 2.3 t ha-1, respectively. About one fourth of the total arable land showed visible erosion damage. Maximum soil losses of about 70 t ha-1 occurred on individual farm plots. Average soil erosion patterns are widely used to underline the severity of an erosion problem (e.g. impacts on water bodies). But since severe rainfall events, wheel tracks, headlands, and other “singularities” often cause high erosion rates, analysis of extreme erosion patterns such as maximum values led to a more differentiated understanding and appropriate conclusions for planning and design of soil protection measures. The study contains an assessment of soil erosion in Switzerland, emphasizing questions about extent, frequency and severity. At the same time, the effects of different types of land management are investigated in the field, aiming at the development of meaningful impact indicators of (un-)sustainable agriculture/soil erosion risk as well as the validation of erosion models. The results illustrate that conservation agriculture including no-till, strip tillage and in-mulch seeding plays an essential role in reducing soil loss as compared to conventional tillage.

Researchers' roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal

Co-production of knowledge between academic and non-academic communities is a prerequisite for research aiming at more sustainable development paths. Sustainability researchers face three challenges in such co-production: (a) addressing power relations; (b) interrelating different perspectives on the issues at stake; and (c) promoting a previously negotiated orientation towards sustainable development. A systematic comparison of four sustainability research projects in Kenya (vulnerability to drought), Switzerland (soil protection), Bolivia and Nepal (conservation vs. development) shows how the researchers intuitively adopted three different roles to face these challenges: the roles of reflective scientist, intermediary, and facilitator of a joint learning process. From this systematized and iterative self-reflection on the roles that a researcher can assume in the indeterminate social space where knowledge is co-produced, we draw conclusions regarding training.

Buffer capacity: capturing a dimension of resilience to climate change in African smallholder agriculture

Building resilience to climate change in agricultural production can ensure the functioning of agricultural-based livelihoods and reduce their vulnerability to climate change impacts. This paper thus explores how buffer capacity, a characteristic feature of resilience, can be conceptualised and used for assessing the resilience of smallholder agriculture to climate change. It uses the case of conservation agriculture farmers in a Kenyan region and examines how their practices contribute to buffer capacity. Surveys were used to collect data from 41 purposely selected conservation agriculture farmers in the Laikipia region of Kenya. Besides descriptive statistics, factor analysis was used to identify the key dimensions that characterise buffer capacity in the study context. The cluster of practices characterising buffer capacity in conservation agriculture include soil protection, adapted crops, intensification/irrigation, mechanisation and livelihood diversification. Various conservation practices increase buffer capacity, evaluated by farmers in economic, social, ecological and other dimensions. Through conservation agriculture, most farmers improved their productivity and incomes despite drought, improved their environment and social relations. Better-off farmers also reduced their need for labour, but this resulted in lesser income-earning opportunities for the poorer farmers, thus reducing the buffer capacity and resilience of the latter.

Modelling susceptibility of grassland soil to macropore flow

Investigating preferential flow, including macropore flow, is crucial to predicting and preventing point sources of contamination in soil, for example in the vicinity of pumping wells. With a view to advancing groundwater protection, this study aimed (i) to quantify the strength of macropore flow in four representative natural grassland soils on the Swiss plateau, and (ii) to define the parameters that significantly control macropore flow in grassland soil. For each soil type we selected three measurement points on which three successive irrigation experiments were carried out, resulting in a total of 36 irrigations. The strength of macropore flow, parameterized as the cumulated water volume flowing from macropores at a depth of 1 m in response to an irrigation of 60 mm h−1 intensity and 1 h duration, was simulated using the dual-permeability MACRO model. The model calibration was based on the key soil parameters and fine measurements of water content at different depths. Modelling results indicate high performance of macropore flow in all investigated soil types except in gleysols. The volume of water that flowed from macropores and was hence expected to reach groundwater varied between 81% and 94% in brown soils, 59% and 67% in para-brown soils, 43% and 56% in acid brown soils, and 22% and 35% in gleysols. These results show that spreading pesticides and herbicides in pumping well protection zones poses a high risk of contamination and must be strictly prohibited. We also found that organic carbon content was not correlated with the strength of macropore flow, probably due to its very weak variation in our study, while saturated water content showed a negative correlation with macropore flow. The correlation between saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) and macropore flow was negative as well, but weak. Macropore flow appears to be controlled by the interaction between the bulk density of the uppermost topsoil layer (0–0.10 m) and the macroporosity of the soil below. This interaction also affects the variations in Ks and saturated water content. Further investigations are needed to better understand the combined effect of all these processes including the exchange between micropore and macropore domains.

Soil and land information: How to support decision-making?

Soils are fundamental to ensuring water, energy and food security. Within the context of sus- tainable food production, it is important to share knowledge on existing and emerging tech- nologies that support land and soil monitoring. Technologies, such as remote sensing, mobile soil testing, and digital soil mapping, have the potential to identify degraded and non- /little-responsive soils, and may also provide a basis for programmes targeting the protection and rehabilitation of soils. In the absence of such information, crop production assessments are often not based on the spatio-temporal variability in soil characteristics. In addition, uncertain- ties in soil information systems are notable and build up when predictions are used for monitor- ing soil properties or biophysical modelling. Consequently, interpretations of model-based results have to be done cautiously. As such they provide a scientific, but not always manage- able, basis for farmers and/or policymakers. In general, the key incentives for stakeholders to aim for sustainable management of soils and more resilient food systems are complex at farm as well as higher levels. The same is true of drivers of soil degradation. The decision- making process aimed at sustainable soil management, be that at farm or higher level, also in- volves other goals and objectives valued by stakeholders, e.g. land governance, improved envi- ronmental quality, climate change adaptation and mitigation etc. In this dialogue session we will share ideas on recent developments in the discourse on soils, their functions and the role of soil and land information in enhancing food system resilience.