Participatory assistance (PA) is a proposed approach for promoting change that involves both the biophysical processes of farms and the management processes of farmers. It integrates external expertise, inputs, and expectations with the unique character of a particular farming system. It focuses on improving the processes of the farm and farmer rather than on the traditional interests of “outsiders” such as disciplinary researchers, industry sales people, government regulators, consumers, or environmental interest groups. As an alternative to transfer of technology, it promotes learning both by the farmer and by specialists from academia, industry, government, and the public. Participatory assistance can promote innovations in the operation of farms, in the conduct of research and education, in the development of products and services, in the formulation of policy, and in the involvement of the public in agriculture. The outcome is not assumed to be the adoption of the “best” technology, but may be found in the emerging properties that result from innovations. Assessing the improvement that follows each innovation will require clear specification of the relevant performance criteria, provision of appropriate technical support, and reinforcement by the appropriate incentives. Reconciling today's farming with water quality protection illustrates the potential of the PA approach.

Energy analysis provides a measure of the effectiveness of sustainable agricultural systems in reducing inputs purchased from off-farm sources. This study compares the total (direct plus indirect) energy costs of growing corn for silage using manufactured N fertilizer or N-fixing legume cover crops. The cover crop either was killed with herbicide in a no-till system or disked in the spring. Economically competitive alternative crop production practices are identified.

In both the no-till and the disked versions, cover-cropped treatments used about half as much energy per hectare as the corresponding winter fallow N-fertilizer treatments. Using vetch to provide N significantly lowered energy use per unit of crop output compared with the N-fertilized treatments. For the treatments that used hairy vetch, either alone or in combination with big/lower vetch, net revenue was statistically equivalent to that of standard-practice treatments in each year of the study.

Research and extension personnel are beginning to look for new strategies to involve more farmers and the non-farm public in their programs. Two approaches we have used are wholefarm case studies (WFCS) and focus groups. WFCS in Oregon and Washington led to several research and educational programming ideas that are currently being pursued in both states. A focus group to study water quality, nitrate leaching and farming practices in Skagit County, Washington is one outcome of the WFCS process. It is made up of 16 people, including farmers, university personnel, members of environmental groups, and government representatives.

We review these two complementary participatory strategies for systems-oriented sustainable agriculture research and education programs. Both have been very useful for building problem-solving partnerships between the land-grant universities and agricultural and environmental constituents in our area. Noteworthy outcomes include: complementary applied on-farm and experiment station research; farming systems analysis; public education; new linkages with environmental and agricultural interest groups; additional grant funds to address identified priority issues; and interdisciplinary teams that cut across the biological and social sciences and include diverse citizen representation.

Ranching in the 1990s involves vivid word pictures with emotions, learning, a bit of humor, and fierce independence, explained Connie, as students and resource specialists sat on hay bales in a small barn on the high desert in central Oregon. Rangeland Resource students listened, a high school English teacher listened, an Extension horticultural specialist listened, and a Bureau of Land Management ecologist listened along with the professor. A wagon wheel stood near a rusty bucket of sagebrush and bunchgrass. Doc contributed short stories, a few facts, and his perspective of the same events. As she continued, Connie looked toward Doc and wondered whether her story was pitched at about the right level of emotion; was she effectively describing their ranching experience in the 1990s? He smiled under a large grey cowboy hat as his boot rested on the wagon wheel. Everyone felt the tension. Inviting environmental advocates to their ranch … was this wise?

Many experiences later, Doc says they have regained independence through collaborative learning with urban dwellers and consumers of their beef products. They welcome people with open minds toward learning. Their vision includes cattle, fish, and wildlife; the 7 inches of rain or snow that falls in winter and must be captured to sustain fish and urban dwellers in August; and sharing beliefs and values about the landscape while fish, grass, and ranchers survive.

Sustainable agriculture has gained acceptance as a conceptual approach for shaping farming systems of the future. All definitions of sustainable agriculture include food productivity, food safety, resource protection, quality of life and environmental quality. However, the sustainability of a wide range of farming systems has been judged only subjectively. Currently there are no scientific criteria to evaluate the sustainability of a specific farming system. We propose a framework for evaluating the relative sustainability of a farming system using nine attributes: profitability, productivity, soil quality, water quality, air quality, energy efficiency, fish and wildlife habitat, quality of life, and social acceptance. Each attribute is scored and then weighted in a way that is subjective and dependent on the judgment of the evaluating team, but that must be expressed numerically. The scoring must be based on quantifiable constraints within each attribute. Constraints can be quantified by direct measurement, which is already true for those related to profitability, productivity, water quality and energy efficiency. Constraints that are not readily measurable will need other evaluation techniques, including expert opinion and computer simulation models.

A 6-yr interdisciplinary field project using large plots was initiated in 1985 to assist Pacific Northwest growers in developing an integrated pest management system to control weeds, reduce erosion and grow crops profitably. Run by a network of 10 to 14 scientists from eight disciplines supported by five agencies, the project showed that wellmanaged conservation tillage systems had a higher average profit and lower economic risk than traditional conventionally tilled systems. Information was disseminated successfully to user groups by field days, plot tours and an educational video. Organizational strategies included an interdisciplinary design with three levels of objectives. Cooperating scientists were invited to participate in writing the proposal and followed strict field protocols and attended mandatory organizational meetings. This long-term study used large machinery, went beyond the transitional stage and allowed treatments to mature. Limitations included the restricted number of experimental variables, the location of the plots, the large labor force required, and publication decisions.

To examine the long-term productivity, profitability, and ecological interactions associated with whole farming systems, we established an interdisciplinary replicated comparison of a conventional and an experimental alternative crop-livestock farming system in southwest Virginia in 1988. The conventional system uses the best management practices commonly used in the mid-Atlantic region. The alternative system puts more emphasis on crop rotation, grazing and forage management, conservation tillage, cover crops, and integrated pest management. Each is managed as a year-round system, with management decisions based on the system's overall goals.

The comparison is planned to run for 10 years, so that only preliminary conclusions can be drawn so far. These include the following: 1) similar total productivity can be achieved with either reduced or full use of herbicides and insecticides; 2) the need for N fertilization can be decreased using grazing management and short-rotation alfalfa; and 3) recycling of manure from cattle fed corn silage provides most nutrients needed for the following corn crop. The comparative profitability of the two systems has fluctuated among years, and it is too early to know which system is more profitable. The process of interdisciplinary systems research has increased our knowledge of total system interactions, challenged prior assumptions, and clarified the methodological problems of integrated systems research.

In 1989, a group of researchers, farmers and farm advisors initiated an interdisciplinary study of the transition from conventional to low-input and organic management of a 4-year, five-crop rotation. Crop yields initially varied among systems, but now appear to be approaching each other after a transition period that included the development of practices and equipment most appropriate for each system. Farming practices and crop production costs are carefully documented to compare the various systems' economic performance and biological risks. Supplying adequate N and managing weeds were challenges for the low-input and organic systems during the first rotation cycle, and experiments are being conducted on an 8-acre companion block to find solutions to these and other problems. Leading conventional and organic growers provide a much-needed farmer perspective on cropping practices and economic interpretations, because we try to provide “best farmer” management of each system. Research groups within the project are focusing on soil microbiology, economics, pest management, agronomy and cover crop management.