Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T22:01:07.668Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A farmer-centered approach to developing information for soil resource management: The Illinois Soil Quality Initiative

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Gerry Walter ,
Michelle Wander  and
Germán Bollero
Gerry Walter
Affiliation:
Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of Human and Community Development, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Michelle Wander
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Germán Bollero
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Agronomy, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742.
Get access

Abstract

The Illinois Soil Quality Initiative (ISQI) is a multidisciplinary effort to develop accurate, practical, and meaningful measures of soil characteristics that farmers can incorporate in strategies to sustain soil resources over the long term. We discuss how the project integrates soils and social research and involves farmers and others in guiding its research activities. A board of farmers, farm managers and conservation agency personnel and a panel of soil scientists, agronomists, and social scientists established ISQI's goals and monitors its progress. ISQI technical staff gather data at 35 participating farms to assess the accuracy and practicality of several measures of physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of soils under varying tillage and environmental conditions. They communicate findings to farmers and the ISQI board through regional farmer meetings, a project newsletter, and statewide conferences. Participating farmers assess the measures' meaningfulness and practicality, suggest strategies for communicating soil quality information, and recommend new directions for research. These observations have been made at the end of ISQI's first year: definitions of and beliefs about soil quality vary widely, making it inadvisable to think of “soil quality” as a single, inclusive concept; farmers and other land managers want to understand better the relationships among soil qualities, productivity, and sustainability, and to ham how to enhance their soils' structural and biological characteristics; soil quality measures must be accompanied by research and education on how soil qualities are affected by management practices or systems and how they affect yields and the environment; many farmers are only mildly interested in self-administered soil quality measures, preferring instead to purchase such data from commercial sources.

Keywords

on-farm researchparticipatory researchsustainable agriculture
Type
Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1997 , pp. 64 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

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

1.Acton, D.F., and Gregorich, L.J.. 1995. The Health of Our Soils: Towards Sustainable Agriculture in Canada. Center for Land and Biological Research, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa.Google Scholar
2.Bawden, R. 1989. Towards action researching systems. Presented at First International Action Research Symposium, Bardon, Queensland, Australia.Google Scholar
3.Breimyer, H.F. 1991. Science and scientific principles in agricultural economics: An historical review. Amer. J. Agric. Economics 73:243–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Bunch, R. 1990. The meaning and benefits of partnership in agricultural research: Past successes—future potentials. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:147–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Busch, L., and Lacy, W.B.. 1983. Science, Agriculture, and the Politics of Research. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
6.Cardwell, V.B. 1991. Balancing moral imperatives through rural development. In Thompson, P.B. and Stout, B.A. (eds). Beyond the Large Farm: Ethics and Research Goals for Agriculture. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 51–78.Google Scholar
7.Cramer, C. 1994. Test your sou's health. New Farm (Jan.):17–21.Google Scholar
8.Dervin, B. 1983. A theoretic perspective and research approach for generating research helpful to communication practice. Paper presented to Assoc. for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication annual meeting, Corvallis, Oregon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Dervin, B. 1984. Research for responsive media design. Paper presented to International Communication Assoc. annual meeting, San Francisco, California.Google Scholar
10.Doll, J. no date. Pedon program. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Dept. of Agric., Springfield, Illinois.Google Scholar
11.Doran, J. 1995. Building soil quality. Proceedings, Opportunities and Challenges in Sustainable Agriculture. Alberta Conservation Tillage Society, Red Deer, Alberta, Canada, pp. 151–158.Google Scholar
12.Doran, J., and Parkin, T.. 1994. Defining and assessing soil quality. In Doran, J., Coleman, D., Bezdicek, D., and Stewart, B. (eds). Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment. Special Pub. No. 35. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer., Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Doran, J., Sarrantonio, M., and Liebig, M.. 1996. Soil health and sustainability. Advances in Agronomy 56:1–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Granatstein, D., and Bezdicek, D.F.. 1992. The need for a soil quality index: Local and regional perspectives. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 17:12–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Grossman, R.B., Glocker, C.L., Engel, R.J., and Muckel, G.B.. 1995. Soil quality musings. Virginia Soil Survey Training Sessions. National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.Google Scholar
16.Ikerd, I.E. 1993. The question of good science. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 8:91–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Krippendorff, K. 1986. On constructing people in social inquiry. Presented at International Communication Assoc. annual meeting, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
18.Krippendorff, K. 1989. On the ethics of constructing communication. In Dervin, B., Grossberg, L., O'Keefe, B.J., and Wartella, E. (eds). Rethinking Communication. Vol. 1: Paradigm Issues. Sage, Newbury Park, California, pp. 66–96.Google Scholar
19.Larson, W.E., and Pierce, J.F.. 1991. Conservation and enhancement of soil quality. In Evaluation for Sustainable Land Management in the Developing World. Vol. 2, Technical Papers. International Board for Soil Research and Management, Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
20.Lockeretz, W. 1987. Establishing the proper role for on-farm research. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 2:132–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Lockeretz, W., and Anderson, M.D.. 1990. Farmers' role in sustainable agriculture research. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:178–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Miller, R.H. 1990. Learning from each other: A look at how we do research. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:151–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.National Research Council. 1989. Alternative Agriculture. Board on Agriculture. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
24.National Research Council. 1993. Soil and Water Quality: An Agenda for Agriculture. Committee on Long-range Soil and Water Conservation. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
25.Rhoades, R.E., and Booth, R.H.. 1982. Farmer back to farmer. Agriec. Administration 11:127–137.Google Scholar
26.Roling, N. 1988. Agricultural information systems. In Roling, N. (ed). Extension Science: Information Systems in Agricultural Development. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, N.Y. pp. 179–212.Google Scholar
27.Rzewnicki, P.E., Thompson, R., Lesoing, G.W., Elmore, R.W., Francis, C.A., Parkhurst, A.M., and Moomaw, R.S.. 1988. On-farm experiment designs and implications for locating research sites. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 3:168–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Suppe, F. 1987. The limited applicability of agricultural research. Agric, and Human Values 4:4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Thompson, R., and Thompson, S.. 1990. The on-farm research program of Practical Farmers of Iowa. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:163–167.Google Scholar
30.Thornley, K. 1990. Involving farmers in agricultural research: A farmer's perspective. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:174–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Watkins, G. 1990. Participatory research: A farmer's perspective. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 5:161–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar