ENHANCING SUST AG

Publications KSA-Series Paper4

ENHANCING SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE THROUGH FARMER GROUPS:
THE EXPERIENCE OF THE KANSAS
HEARTLAND SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE NETWORK

Jerry Jost, David Norman, and Stan Freyenberger

KANSAS SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE SERIES, PAPER # 4

ABSTRACT

This paper reports the experiences of the Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network with respect to farmer clusters or groups and concludes they have been positive. The paper includes statements from farmers and others and indicates that they can potentially be a very powerful vehicle for facilitating sustainable agriculture since they empower farmers and encourage interactive dialogue both amongst farmers themselves and with outsiders.

(Contribution No. 97-160-D from the Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station. Jerry Jost is Coordinator of the Heartland Project, Kansas Rural Center, Whiting, Kansas 66552 and David Norman and Stan Freyenberger are Professor and Research Assistant respectively in the Department of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas, 66506.)

CONTENTS

Background
Rationale
Group Formation

- The Approach Used in the Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network
- Factors Critical to Successful Group Formation

Day-to-Day Operation of Farmer Groups
Sustainability of Farmer Clusters
Conclusion
References

BOXES

Box 1: Farmer Groups Provide Mutual Support
Box 2: Outsiders Benefit from Dealing with Farmer Groups
Box 3: Sharing Information Accelerates the Learning Curve
Box 4: Collective Marketing Helps Farmers
Box 5: Need for Systems Thinking, Not Just Recipes
Box 6: Group Learning Can Facilitate Group Action
Box 7: Farmer Groups Can Influence the Agricultural Research Agendas of Land Grant Universities
Box 8: Farmer Groups and External Linkages Are Potentially the Keys to Survival
Box 9: Work Sharing Builds Group Participation and Trust
Box 10: Find Appropriate Roles for Farmer Group Members
Box 11: Self and Group Awareness Exercises Can Enhance Leadership Development
Box 12: Different Challenges Can Develop Leadership Qualities
Box 13: Leadership Can Benefit from Transparency
Box 14: Members of Groups Are Important in Providing Support for the Leadership
Box 15: Interaction Between Farmer Groups Helps Information Exchange
Box 16: Network Meetings Can Build Bridges with Outsiders
Box 17: External Funding Can Facilitate Externally Farmer Group Formation
Box 18: Whole-farm Planning Is a Shared Vision in Many Heartland Clusters
Box 19: Ensure Transparency in Communication Within Farmer Clusters

BACKGROUND

In recent years, farmer groups have become very popular in agricultural related activities in both low and high income countries. These have been both formal (e.g., cooperatives) and informal in nature. Many factors have motivated the formation of groups, including an efficient means for transmitting information (e.g., extension); sharing information (e.g., study circles, focus groups); identifying and evaluating relevant technologies; improving on-farm/off-farm linkages (e.g., particularly providing credit, purchasing inputs, and marketing of products); and encouraging empowerment of farmers (e.g., influencing research agendas).

The Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network that was launched three years ago empowers farmers and rural communities to develop and practice integrated farming systems that effectively balance farm profit with resource conservation, using an operational mode that encourages two-way interaction between farmers and others representing agricultural institutions. The Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network identified 13 communities to host clusters of innovative farm and ranch families committed to the investigation and adoption of sustainable farming systems. These clusters are developing community-based approaches to overcome their barriers to sustainable agriculture by sharing experiences and engaging in mutually beneficial joint activities that enhance quality of life, including assurance of adequate income.

As a result of our experiences with the farmer groups or clusters both in the Heartland Sustainable Agricultural Network and elsewhere, we are convinced that they provide a valuable mechanism for dealing with the very complex issues relating to sustainability. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to summarize these experiences, so that they can be taken into account in using farmer clusters in future initiatives relating to sustainable agriculture in Kansas and elsewhere. To accomplish this, the paper is divided to into a number of sections. The first expands on the rationale for having farmer groups or clusters, the second relates to their formation, the third deals with operational issues, and last section considers matters relating to their sustainability. To illustrate some of the major points, anecdotal information from various sources, but especially farmers, is given in a box format.

RATIONALE

Successful groups build mutual empowerment. Five very important reasons for encouraging the formation of farmer groups that are not necessarily specific to sustainable agriculture are the following:

To provide support for each other (Box 1). This becomes particularly important when farmers are planning or implementing changes, especially if they are unconventional. Obviously, many initiatives relating to sustainable agriculture currently fall in that category. Having the support of other farmers who share the same vision or goals is critically important for farmers being willing to start and persevere with sustainable agriculture initiatives.

Box 1: Farmer Groups Provide Mutual Support

"The only way I'd try management intensive grazing was if I could talk these guys (other cluster members) into trying it too. If he only lives three or four miles from me and I could see he was on the right track, I could ask 'When did you plant that? What was the seeding rate?' I could feel more confident it would work on my farm since it was close. But if it was in Oklahoma, it would still be quite a gamble." Steve Suther, Four Seasons Cluster

To obtain, impart, and exchange information. These are particularly important functions of groups for improving the efficiency with which outsiders can deal with farmers both in giving and collecting information (Box 2) and ensuring greater use by farmers of information possessed by other farmers (Box 3). An attitude survey on research and experimentation among Kansas farmers indicated a desire to have greater input in the research process. Farmers were enthusiastic about on-farm research, and personal experiences and communication with other farmers were two of the most important and reliable sources of information [Freyenberger et al, 1994]. The importance of sharing information also has been noted by other researchers: "Producers often feel they learn most by watching what new ideas are being tried on their neighbor's land. Formal and informal on-farm research and demonstrations, done on large tracts, are highly valued as sources of decision-making information" [Eberle and Shroyer, 1997]. The need for sharing information is becoming particularly important, because many current agricultural problems are fundamentally human challenges that require more than just technology for their resolution [Hesterman and Thorburn, 1994].

Box 2: Outsiders Benefit from Dealing with Farmer Groups

Working with clusters of farmers is much more effective than working with single farmers in multiplying the impact of the Kansas Rural Center’s (KRCs) initiatives. Consequently, the KRC has reoriented its program initiatives to working within a farmer group context under the auspices of the Heartland Network. Kansas Rural Center

Box 3: Sharing Information Accelerates the Learning Curve

"Our cluster for me has accelerated the learning curve by years through learning shared by several people." Scott Nichols, Smoky Hills Cluster

To create opportunities that would not be available if farmers operated independently. Obvious examples of these would be collective purchase of inputs to take advantage of price discounts and collective marketing of products to improve efficiency of marketing and service specific outlets (Box 4).

Box 4: Collective Marketing Helps Farmers

One Heartland cluster, Rolling Prairie Alliance, over the past two years has developed a subscription fresh-produce service with eight growers and 300 weekly customers. Before the Heartland Project, these eight growers knew each other but didn’t share any business. After the first focus group discussion, this group decided to share a subscription market. Their growth of sales is shown in Table 1. They work with a local food co-op with recipes, sample meals, and nutritional education. Sales in the co-op also increased as a result of this weekly partnership by an estimated $1,000 on the day of the farmer deliveries. The co-op manager commented: "The Mercantile store comes alive with the farmers, with everyone feeling good." This co-op has been very popular with the media, with coverage in six different newspapers and on a Kansas City television station.

Table 1: Gross Sales and Customers,Rolling Prairie Alliance			Table 2: Gross Sales and Growers, Kansas Organic Growers
Year	Gross Sales ($)	Customers (Nos/Week)	Year	Gross Sales ($)	Growers (Nos)^b
1994 1995 1996^a	28,000 53,000 80,000	135 235 300	1993 1994 1995 1996^a	20,680 214,656 285,524 425,000	12 (1) 19 (4) 28 (5) 33 (4)
a. Projected			a. Projected b. First figure indicates certified organic and second indicates pending certification

Another Heartland cluster, the Kansas Organic Producers, is a marketing cooperative that collectively brokers organic grain to both domestic and Japanese buyers. These farmers cooperatively determine prices, clean seed, send test samples, coordinate storage, and transport their grain. Aware that sales to Asia aren’t sustainable over the long term, they are exploring buying a small grain processor to diversify their marketing. Contacts and sales to different buyers have strengthened their marketing (Table 2). Although soybeans have dominated their sales, they are slowly diversifying to include corn, oats, red clover, alfalfa, and hairy vetch. Plans are underway to branch out to meat marketing. New computers and skills now increase management effectiveness. They have applied for grant support from the Kansas Value-Added Center and the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education program to expand their marketing ability. The cluster coordinator concludes: "I continue to be impressed with how cooperation in farm marketing and production creates opportunities that otherwise would be unavailable."

To leverage institutional resources. Farmer groups can encourage collective representation and action, particularly with external agencies/institutions. Such actions, in turn, facilitate farmers believing in themselves and in their ability to control their own destinies. This has been a particularly important principle underlying the Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network and has been a key component in the enthusiastic support many farmers give to the Heartland Project.
To encourage systems thinking and dialogue because of locational specificity of solutions. This last reason relates to the need for thinking in a systems perspective and the fact that solutions to problems are likely to be farm and farm family specific (Box 5). Consequently, solutions are not likely to be mechanistic or recipe driven but rather evolve after extensive thinking and consultation (i.e., through discussions with others, especially farmers, and reading relevant materials). Any major change in behavior (in this case, a shift from conventional to sustainable agriculture) involves new paradigms of thinking [Covey, 1991]. The challenge of sustainable agriculture is to shift mental gears from the competitive "top yield" farm characteristic of conventional farming to the "high quality of life" farm characteristic of sustainable agriculture. The move from recipe-driven solutions to applying "thinking risks" that develop appropriate system solutions for their own farms means that farmers have to develop their own expertise in using management tools suitable for addressing their own farm's goals and values. Management complexity increases in sustainable agriculture because of its multidimensional nature involving the need to balance quality of life, profitability, resource conservation, and community responsibility [Norman et al, 1996]. In sustainable agriculture, this move to increasing emphasis on process rather than just product obviously enhances the importance of the constructive interaction potentially available in farmer groups (Box 5).

Box 5: Need for Systems Thinking, Not Just Recipes

"We need to stop expecting easy answers but rather ask system questions." Darrel Parks, Kaw Valley Cluster.

"A neighbor quizzed me wanting a cookbook answer. I don’t have one. I only listed options. I think he was frustrated." Calvin Carlson, Smoky Hills Cluster

Example of dialogue between two farmers:

"Calvin introduced me to the idea of management intensive grazing (MIG). When I started asking questions of him, he didn’t have a whole lot of answers for me. He pointed me to reading materials and people he had been talking to and said I would have to do my homework myself." Calvin Carlson, Smoky Hills Cluster

"Bruce wanted answers, and I didn’t have answers for him. People often want answers and there are no pat answers. They have to dig in and do the homework themselves. But it is different from conventional farming because there are no recipes. Every farm will be different and there is so much variation. This is one area that creates frustration in people." Bruce Spare, Smoky Hills Cluster

Thus, the benefits of forming farmer groups or clusters are many. Indeed they are even greater than the discussion above would suggest. This is because the benefits given are not necessarily mutually exclusive and, in fact, can reinforce each other through interaction. Cooperative learning about better or new ways of management can become a tool for empowerment, for example, in collective action (Box 6). Also, outside institutions (e.g., research organizations) see greater benefits and efficiencies in cooperative activities with groups of farmers, while at the same time, farmers can influence the activities of such organizations to some extent (Box 7). Thus, groups of farmers also have greater leverage than individuals in influencing or encouraging institutional change. The key to facilitating this change is in bringing the different stakeholders together in a collegiate operational mode. Constructive interaction between the stakeholders can be mutually beneficial (Box 8).

Box 6: Group Learning Can Facilitate Group Action

Tallgrass Prairie Producers, a Heartland cooperative, working with the Kansas Value Added-Center, the Small Business Development Center, and the KSU Department of Animal Sciences and Industry is developing a processing, marketing, and distribution system for beef products from grain-fed cattle. This cooperative of nine Flint Hill ranchers participated in group-building sessions, developed a group decision-making process, constructed a strategic business plan, and set up an effective committee system. Market research tools have included two focus groups, a marketing survey, several taste tests, a card-sort survey, carcass analysis, and a literature review. Three public tastings, five newspaper articles, a TV story, a tour with the Society for Range Management, and a conference on farmer cooperative marketing advanced their public visibility. Tallgrass has a federal label and is developing certification for their claims of grass-finished, hormone- and antibiotic-free, and family ranch production. They sell products to a hospital, restaurant, and a food retail cooperative and boxed beef directly to customers. During the first 6 months of being officially in business together, they sold their first 29 head through the Tallgrass Cooperative and have a goal of selling 200 head by the end of the year (1996). Ranchers summarize their cluster experience as follows: "I have been cautious about what we have been trying to do until last weekend at my 25-year reunion at Texas Christian University. I was talking to one of my old professors and he told me we were on the future cutting edge. Now I am ready to go ... Developing our co-op needs to be seen as a part of ranch work ... The strength of Tallgrass is all of us doing this together, sharing skills, and a producing a product that appeals to the market ... Twenty-five years ago I was in a radio interview, and I said the future of agriculture is in marketing. Twenty-five years later I am finally here." Tallgrass Prairie Producers

Box 7: Farmer Groups Can Influence the Agricultural Research Agendas of Land Grant Universities

The Green Hills Project has influenced the University of Missouri’s Forage Systems Research Center to investigate pasture finishing of beef cattle. The station superintendent remarked to Trico Graziers, another Heartland cluster: "The Green Hills Project, which is similar to your cluster, is responsible for getting this research started. We had meetings and worked pretty closely together, and they were talking about pasture finishing and marketing. And that really is what got me interested in it. I began to realize that was a need. It was appropriate, and so that is how we got into it." Station Superintendent, Forage Systems Research Center, University of Missouri

Two Heartland Project clusters have linked up with two KSU Research Centers to conduct complementary on-farm and on-station cover crop research. These links at the local level are shaping institutional change and enabled SARE (Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education) program funding to be obtained. The coordinator of one of the collaborating clusters has commented as follows: "One thing I really appreciate about our cluster is even though we are spread out over a five county area, we all share an interest in cover crops. All the farmers bring a different experience with a special interest that they focus on. A lot of things that probably wouldn’t work on an experiment field may work when a farmer gets to looking at it and tries to fine-tune it. That is where farmers with their inventiveness and creativeness have a lot to offer to research stations. One of the things that has been exciting for me is this cooperative effort with KSU with these on-farm and on-station trials with hairy vetch and winter peas. Those groups have a lot to contribute to each other. Farmers do a lot of tweaking of the system. They play with seeding rates and tillage and with a lot of things that a true researcher has trouble manipulating. This is because the researcher sets up his experiment in advance, and it is hard to change in midstream, whereas the farmer is less concerned about standard deviation and coefficients of variation. Farmers are concerned with what they see. Ninety percent of the field may be a failure, but they see one part of the field where something has worked. They are able to key off that, and the next year they are hopefully able to get it to work. So I see this as a really healthy mix when farmers and researchers can work together, because the researchers can get hard data on some of the farmer ideas. These hard figures are useful to help persuade some of our more conventional neighbors who may think we are doing voodoo agriculture." Russ Toevs, Covered Acres

In the 1940s and 1950s, the Extension Service sponsored corn and beef improvement clubs. These clubs effectively helped spread postwar agricultural technologies throughout rural America. The Alternative Energy Resources Organization in Montana began "farm improvement clubs" in 1990. A minimum of four farmers can receive up to $800 to make sustainable changes on their farms. As these clubs developed an interest in cereal-legume rotations, they found Montana State University more responsive to conducting research on these rotations. [Matheson, 1993]

Box 8: Farmer Groups and External Linkages Are Potentially the Keys to Survival

A new partnership within the Heartland Network is an agribusiness co-op that helped organize a new grazing cluster, the Flint Hills Grazers. A sales representative for the co-op explained why he was helping organize their farmer members: "These dairy farmers will have to either make changes, or they will be out of business in five years. That’s why we’re working with starting a grazing group. Farmers are necessary for the co-op to survive." Sales Representative, Agribusiness Cooperative

GROUP FORMATION

The Approach Used in the Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network

Over a period of a decade, the KRC established relationships with farmers and Kansas State University (KSU) on sustainable agriculture with on-farm trials and education. In 1992 as a result of receiving the Kellogg Foundation IFS (Integrated Farming Systems) Grant for the formation of the Heartland Project, the KRC with the help of a local farmer, recruited interested farmers to participate in a focus group discussion. The KRC contacted 22 farmers about being local organizers for a focus group discussion concerning the Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network. Focus group discussions were held with 13 different farming communities. Two other communities were approached through a short presentation with a question and answer session. A set of questions presented to the farmers focused on farm goals, barriers, attitudes toward sustainable agriculture, and potential cooperative solutions. Participating farmers were rewarded for participation with a meal and a book or magazine of their choice on alternative farming practices. Participants were offered an opportunity to organize themselves into a cluster to apply for a Heartland Project grant over a 3-year period. Clusters developed their own decision-making process, goals, membership, work plans, and budgets. In all, KRC participated in 43 meetings, with a combined attendance of 450 people, that encouraged the development of cluster grant proposals.

Sixteen clusters presented written grant proposals to the Heartland Initiation Team composed of farmers and KRC and KSU representatives. One or two representatives from each of these clusters also gave a 5-minute oral presentation to all the cluster representatives and the Heartland Initiation Team. The team then interviewed each cluster privately concerning their proposals. The Heartland Initiation Team spent several hours over the next 2 days in making the final selection of 12 clusters. Based on the strong presentations and the larger than anticipated interest, the KRC revised its original budget to reallocate more program dollars directly to clusters.

The clusters chose one of its members to be the coordinator who organized meetings, preformed treasurer duties, kept records, and coordinated activities. In 8 of the clusters, this farmer was paid to carry out these functions. Three clusters have outgrown their collective purpose and have disbanded. Two new clusters have emerged and also have been supported.

The individual farmer clusters have been melded into the Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network. A number of initiatives have been used to facilitate this bonding. These include the following:

Cluster coordinators meet with their peers twice a year to share experiences, set personal farm goals, visit farms, and conduct project business.

The annual Heartland Roundup draws together all the clusters, collaborators, and the public (including KSU staff) for a meal of locally grown food and for the purposes of listening to keynote speakers, attending workshops, and personal networking. Care is provided for younger children.

Clusters have been encouraged to establish contact with each other on matters of common interest. Means for doing these have included visits to each others farms, conference calls, and sharing outside speakers.

Clusters have been encouraged to develop linkages with external institutions such as Extension, Experiment Station, or a local business. Small project partnership grants up to $5,000 between a farmer(s) and an institutional representative(s) have been made available under the Heartland Project to facilitate such cooperation/ collaboration.

Factors Critical to Successful Group Formation

Experience within the Heartland Project and experiences elsewhere [for example, see Groverman, Cook and Thomas, 1994] have convinced us that a number of critical determinants underlie the successful formation of groups. Four of the major ones are as follows:

A participatory mode of operation is needed between members both before and after group formation. To accomplish this, the members need to: have common interests that translate into clearly focussed (i.e., limited number) objectives; agree on operational rules for the group and assignment of responsibilities within the group; and, be willing to actively play their part in discussions, be involved in the necessary decision-making activities, help keep the requisite records, and participate in the group activities (Box 9). Consequently, during the group formation process and also afterwards group members should be encouraged to use imagination, creativity, and synergy in exploring opportunities and identifying solutions to pressing problems.

Box 9: Work Sharing Builds Group Participation and Trust

During the last year, five farm families in the Green Hills cluster worked together to home-process 3,000 broilers. They also laid water lines and repaired the storm-damaged barn at the University of Missouri’s research station.

The Resourceful Farmers cluster also focused on cooperative chicken processing. Their coordinator stated: "Spending several mornings together working and enjoying each other’s company is important. I remember a particularly beautiful day last October ... I couldn’t think of a more beautiful day."

The Rolling Prairie cluster builds common identity through their weekly deliveries, and the Kansas Organic Producers share work of cleaning seed, transportation, and fixing up a small processor that they are considering purchasing.

To facilitate the above, the groups need to be voluntary, democratic, fairly small, and reasonably homogenous in terms of farming systems and resources at their disposal. Successful programs evolve from people who are self-motivated, trustworthy, and opportunity minded and know how to work with others. The challenge is to help bring these people together around a shared vision. Together they attract others and the resources to make it happen. Under such circumstances, group members are more likely to trust each other and accept joint responsibility for any actions the group takes. Individuals must see personal self-interest served within the collective group interest.

Such desirable traits as outlined in the previous two paragraphs rarely occur spontaneously. Rather, they have to be encouraged through sensitive and responsible leadership. Cluster leaders who earn the respect of members through their character and commitment build trust and create a worthy example for others to follow. Leadership must communicate a vision of how their cooperation can move the group from independence to interdependence for the benefit of everyone. Although some people already possess strong leadership abilities, others can enhance their leadership qualities through on-the-job experiences by working with other people on issues that they care about and providing them with appropriate roles to fill within the group (Box 10). Another useful tool in developing leadership qualities can be self- and group-awareness exercises (Box 11). At the same time, leadership qualities are further enhanced and made more versatile by providing opportunities for such individuals to operate outside their usual milieu (i.e., comfort zone) (Box 12). The foundation for effective leadership is a sound personal character, supplemented by an attractive personality, appropriate social graces, charisma, and relevant technical expertise and human connections (Box 13). In the end, leadership shows itself in the ability to set priorities, to organize resources around those priorities, and to implement activities in a disciplined manner. Leadership, however, does require support in order to be effective, particularly in situations where something is being advocated that is different from conventional wisdom. Group members themselves can provide such support (Box 14). Networking, which is discussed in the following paragraph, also can provide support.

Box 10: Find Appropriate Roles for Farmer Group Members

The Rolling Prairie cluster uses its more extroverted members in dealing with the public, a math-minded member to be the accountant, a respected grower to monitor quality control, a former chef to sell excess produce to restaurants, and a member with years of military experience to coordinate production.

A fair proportion of farmers dislike book work. Consequently, expecting them to handle paperwork is unlikely to be acceptable, but they may be able to make good public presentations. Alternatively, some farmers dislike public speaking roles but are very much at ease in roles that coordinate work days, transportation, or tables and chairs.

Box 11: Self and Group Awareness Exercises Can Enhance Leadership Development

The Tallgrass Prairie Producers cluster used a DiSC Personal Development Profile and a CARE Profile as tools to identify how individuals fit together in an effective business team. The cluster coordinator reflected: "One great session involved a personality analysis exercise where we learned how we tend to function in a group. We learned that people have very different roles in a group. And instead of being upset that everyone is not like us, we can be reassured that these different personalities complement each other and give the group strength. For example, I tested out to be an objective thinker described as restrained, logical, calculating, and precise, whose goals are correctness and accuracy. Another member in our group tested as a promoter, who is described as enthusiastic, sociable, entertaining and spontaneous, and whose goals are approval and popularity. No, I don’t think these tests are foolproof. But I know in many ways, this fellow and I are opposites. Sometimes his lack of organization drives me crazy. But guess what? When we had our first promotional activity, we needed someone to go out in the crowd and draw in people. And who do you think was good at it? I was petrified and begged to come in as quickly as possible. I couldn’t do it. He went out and stayed out all day. He just loved it, and people loved him. He was a wonderful asset to the group. Everyone is going to have their strengths. When you are forming a group and thinking about bringing people in, think of all the different levels of strengths and assets that they can bring to the group." Annie Wilson, Tallgrass Prairie Producers Cluster

Box 12: Different Challenges Can Develop Leadership Qualities

The Kaw Valley cluster coordinator, Darrell Parks, agreed to spend two days last summer traveling with three professional people from the Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture to meet the Kansas media and discuss the new farm bill. He later said: "I was not really comfortable to begin with doing it or even agreeing to do it. Actually, I was extremely nervous at first, but it got easier. I never got completely comfortable, but I did feel I made progress ... It was a crazy couple of days. As chairman of the KRC, I felt I had a responsibility to be a spokesperson for the organization." He now feels it was a good learning experience, helped raise public awareness about policy issues, and gave him new confidence.

Box 13: Leadership Can Benefit from Transparency

County Extension and Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) agents visiting sustainable agriculture farms often view the farmers within the context of the outside social community. It is quite likely that such farmers will have established some sort of reputation from past interaction with those public agencies, civic and religious organizations, and other farmers. One farm family opened their financial books for the past few years and invited their farm accountant to comment on their transition. The books showed that during this transition, they had lost money for the first time, and the husband was forced to take an off-farm job. It was obvious that this was not easy for this farm couple to share, but they wanted to be fully honest with their visitors. This farm visit received the highest rating with respect to a training program that took place during those two days. It is likely that the favorable rating was based partially on the trust that is generated when people are willing to be honest and open even to the public and strangers. Jerry Jost, Kansas Rural Center

Box 14: Members of Groups Are Important in Providing Support for the Leadership

If leadership involves advocating something unconventional (e.g., sustainable agriculture), then it is important to have a supportive group. An unwritten rule of many rural communities is that behaving differently from the generally accepted norms isn’t welcomed. The challenge is to provide a sense of belonging for individuals with imagination, innovation, and critical questions. One grazing cluster in their first focus group talked about the barrier of reactionary negativism within their community. The first meeting of mostly strangers resulted in a transition towards a group of friends. Cluster talk now occurs in the church lobby, parking lot, county extension office, and on each other’s farms.

If the initial inspiration for forming farmer groups is external, then it is very important to have some form of networking between farmer groups, as exemplified by the Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network discussed earlier. Undoubtedly, networking is viewed as critically important by farmers in sustainable agriculture as a means for accessing information that is not readily available from outsiders [Norman et al, 1996] (Box 15). Such networking also can be a way of building bridges with outside institutions and individuals (Box 16). Such types of initiatives also can facilitate bonding and create feelings of mutual support and common destiny and reduce feelings of isolationism. A broader network also can play an important role in validating or supporting the experiences of farmer innovators by communicating their stories to the general public.

Box 15: Interaction between Farmer Groups Helps Information Exchange

The Smoky Hills and Four Seasons clusters had a joint tour of the Hubbard ranch and after supper discussed topics of mutual interest.

Conference calls between clusters have been used to resolve issues relating to the transition into new farming practices (e.g., management intensive grazing and pastured poultry).

Conference calls also have been used to plan Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network activities. During the next two years, the Heartland Network will use the conference call system to extend the direct marketing of farm products in the north central region of Kansas through a SARE grant.

Box 16: Network Meetings Can Build Bridges with Outsiders

The annual Heartland Roundup is targeted to Heartland farmers but also attracts interested outsiders (e.g., KSU staff, conventional farmers).

After one such meeting, a county agent stated: "Fantastic! Incredible! It really rejuvenated my emotional battery. I went back to the office the next week and wrote my newspaper column on creating a vision for your farm and setting goals. It was so good to spend an entire day with people who really cared about the land, quality of life, and their families."

Also a farmer wrote the following lines: "It opened my eyes. My goals are changing ... Best of all was just talking to Heartland Sustainable Agriculture Network people and hearing their enthusiasm and success stories. No, best of all was having our conventional agricultural friends attend with us and listening to their positive feedback about it the whole way home! One was talking about the people he wants to bring back next year!"

Another ingredient that can be important in the development of groups, especially if the initial impetus for their formation is external, is the provision of funds and organizing assistance. However, we are reluctant to conclude that group success is dependent on external funding. Regardless of the funding, the purpose of the group must be accountable to the needs and vision of the members. In the case of the Heartland Project, some external funding apparently was important in the initial stages (Box 17), because farmers did not initially appreciate the benefits resulting from forming groups.

Box 17: External Funding Can Facilitate Externally Stimulated Farmer Group Formation

Individual clusters have received between $1,000 and $29,750 over a three-year period. Roughly 40% went to cluster coordinators, and 60% went for local cluster activities. Jerry Jost, Kansas Rural Center

"The financial commitment with Kellogg so far is the backbone of the whole education system that will allow the clusters to educate a lot of people by doing rather than just talking about it." Steve Burr, Smoky Hills Cluster

DAY-TO-DAY OPERATION OF FARMER GROUPS

A key precondition to successful day-to-day operation of farmer groups is ensuring that the issues relating to their formation, which were discussed earlier, are addressed satisfactorily. If this is done, then optimal performance of farmer groups is achieved through common understanding and needs, transparency, and accountability in daily operations. More specific issues relating to these are:

Members of farmer groups must continue to have a shared vision, motivation, and aspirations in order to provide a focal point for group activities (Box 18). This is facilitated by avoiding, to the extent possible, the use of words, terms, and expressions that are not familiar to all group members (Box 19).

Box 18: Whole-Farm Planning Is a Shared Vision in Many Heartland Clusters

In many clusters, whole-farm planning is viewed as a key to having successful farm families. Setting long- and short-term goals, establishing a shared decision-making process, and monitoring progress toward goals is viewed as important in ensuring successful management. Holistic Resource Management (HRM) is one popular tool used by clusters to develop these goals. The cluster model can provide a supportive atmosphere to "group test" ongoing individual management decisions, identify weak links, and suggest creative options. Ideally, this enhances creativity, accountability, and honesty, thus paving the way for wiser management decisions.

Six clusters have sponsored HRM planning or training. The Green Hills cluster and the University of Missouri’s Forage Systems Research Center are jointly developing an HRM goal for one of the university’s demonstration farms. Farmers have stated that: "This training was helpful in looking at the entire farm including family and lifestyle. It was a major stepping stone to get more family involvement in the farm. When I make decisions, I use the testing guidelines so that I can know I’m not kidding myself ... One thing I didn’t realize at the time when I first started in the cluster was the potential value of HRM. What I gained out of the class I attended was that grazing was not the end. It was just one tool that makes a lot of sense. You have to change your whole way of thinking."

Box 19: Ensure Transparency in Communication within Farmer Clusters

One of the cluster coordinators in the Heartland Project wasn’t familiar with the words sustainable agriculture until well into the project. He was attracted to the cluster because he was frustrated with what conventional agriculture was doing to family life, and he thought that management intensive grazing was a better alternative. A little less than 3 years later, he was talking to an annual conference of Kansas extension agents about how sustainable agriculture took shape on his farm, participating in a KSU focus group about indicators of sustainability, and hosting 40 KSU and NRCS agents on his farm and explaining this alternative agricultural practices. Practical benefits from change attracted this individual -- not any "popular appeal" relating to sustainability of agriculture.

In the light of the above, it is important that clusters regularly (e.g., once per year) reevaluate and, if necessary, adjust their goals, planned activities, and budgets based upon what they have learned from the recent past. This planning must build cluster activities that directly reward members for participation. These could take a number of forms, for example, better farm management, improved profitability, added biodiversity, or higher quality of life. Farm visits and discussions about management options are strong group-organizing tools.

In the interests of transparency and accountability, each cluster coordinator should be responsible for ensuring preparation of an annual report and a statement of expenditures.

To ensure continuity, transparency, and accountability, agreement must be reached on the obligations of members and frequency of meetings and joint activities. These can vary significantly from cluster to cluster. For example, marketing cooperatives are likely to require the most frequent collective activities with some getting together every week during the selling season. Other clusters may meet more irregularly and make adjustments according to seasonal farm demands.

SUSTAINABILITY OF FARMER CLUSTERS

Many of the factors relating to the sustainability of farmer clusters relate back to issues discussed with respect to the formation of clusters and their day-to-day management. Without continuing satisfactory resolution of those issues, farmer clusters are unlikely to be sustainable in the long run. Three other critical factors influencing the sustainability of farmer clusters are the following:

Farmers operate in a dynamic ever-changing environment, and the goals and activities of farmer clusters need to be sufficiently flexible and responsive to address the changing constraints, needs, and opportunities faced by its members. Effective clusters grow through the forming, storming, norming, and performing stages of development. All other things being equal, there is considerable merit in adjusting goals and activities of farmer clusters over time rather than disbanding and forming new ones. This is because of the dynamics relating to human relationships within farmer clusters. In the initial stages, these may not be well developed, but careful attention to the various issues discussed earlier can result in increasingly interactive relationships that give rise to mutual trust and hence sharing. The time needed to reach this stage varies, but the major benefits from farmer clusters only start becoming obvious when this stage is reached. Because it is not always possible to predict in advance how long this will take and whether, in fact, this will occur, there is considerable merit in seeking ways in which successful farmer clusters can have longer lives. Remaining relevant through flexibility in goals and activities over time is one way of facilitating such longevity. No adjustments over time will inevitably reduce the sustainability of farmer clusters. As far as day-to-day operation of farmer clusters and their sustainability are concerned, a shifting focal point (i.e., with reference to goals and activities) over time is likely to be much more effective than pursuing a number of foci at any one point in time. Clusters who rate high in the group development process apparently have women playing major roles. Women in such groups often have leadership roles and help in coordination, communication, and organization of the clusters. Women in these groups participate and voice their opinions freely. Some groups do have an end, and it is important that this is well understand by farmers and that past cooperation is celebrated rather than disbanding occurring with feelings of ill-will.

Farmers are most likely to continue being members of specific clusters as long as they perceive that the benefits of belonging to them outweigh the costs associated with them. In this respect, clusters with a marketing function requiring collective action are likely to be most sustainable, because these influence the prices farmers receive for their products (i.e., adds value). On the other hand, clusters in which the main activity relates to learning and sharing information may be more vulnerable in the long run, unless the subject matter changes over time or the need for emotional support continues. Adding new members may delay the need for adjustment, as will situations where farmer clusters see as part of their role reaching outside the group by promoting and sharing their knowledge with others. Groups that choose to be highly public show a willingness to be followed, coupled with strong confidence in themselves and the results of their activities.

Attention needs to be paid to the possibility of burnout of the leadership and more active members. To avoid this, it is important to rotate leadership and other responsibilities amongst the farmer cluster members. This is less risky and easier to do once the group has bonded and the prevailing attitude is one of mutual trust and sharing.

Continued external funding is certainly helpful in keeping the momentum of clusters going. At the very least, this support should be used in organizing new groups and in helping the transfer of information between existing groups. However, sustainability of farmer groups remains dependent on leadership development, farmer empowerment, continuing perception of net benefits as far as members are concerned, and local control.

CONCLUSION

The experience of the Heartland Project with respect to farmer groups has been very positive, and we are convinced that they can play a critically important role in encouraging and nurturing the implementation of sustainable agriculture. In conclusion, this is because:

Sustainable agriculture requires strong management skills. It is not just product oriented (i.e., which concentrates on technological innovations), but because of its multiple objectives, the process of making decisions becomes critically important in determining how successfully it is implemented. Thus, learning and sharing become important in adopting sustainable agriculture and can be done easily in a farmer cluster format.

Many of the relevant solutions to sustainable agriculture are locational specific. Once again, a group format is likely to be efficient in identifying the relevant strategies for specific localities.

The farmer group approach can help in the empowerment of farmers. While improving the efficiency with which extension, research, and other institutions can interact with farmers, the group format also potentially empowers farmers by harnessing the help of such institutions in identifying system-based responses to local needs. Empowerment of farmers also occurs through collective action in marketing of products (i.e., particularly niche marketing).

REFERENCES

Covey, S.R., 1991. Principle-Centered Leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Eberle, W.M. and J.P. Shroyer, 1997. "Using Farmer Focus Groups to Assess Cropping-System Decision Factors in the Wheat-Fallow Area of Western Kansas." Journal of Natural Resources Life Science Education, 26:24-28.

Freyenberger, S.L. Bloomquist, D. Norman, D. Regehr, and B. Schurle, 1994. "On-Farm Research in Kansas: A Survey of Farmers Opinions." Report of Progress 720. Manhattan: Agricultural Experiment Station, Kansas State University.

Groverman, V., J. Cook, and G. Thomas, 1994. The Group Promoter's Resource Book. Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.

Hesterman, O. B and T. L. Thorburn, 1994. " A Comprehensive Approach to Sustainable Agriculture: W.K. Kellogg's Integrated Farming Systems Initiative." Journal of Production Agriculture, 7:132-134.

Matheson, N., 1993. "Montana's Farm Improvement Clubs Are a Collaborative Learning Community." Sustainable Farming Quarterly, Vol. 5 No.1.

Norman, D., L. Bloomquist, R. Janke, S. Freyenberger, J. Jost, B. Schurle, and H. Kok, 1997. "Sustainable Agriculture: Reflections of a Few Kansas Practitioners." (Being submitted for publication) Manhattan, Kansas: Kansas State University.

[top of paper]