Very little has been published about the local knowledge of
farmers involved in capital-
intensive agriculture in industrial societies. The few
relatively detailed studies of local
agricultural knowledge in countries such as Canada, the USA
and Australia have tended to
focus on relatively distinct 'communities' of farmers with
specific traditions. This article
presents a brief account of a study of local knowledge of
dryland salinity among farmers in
the Hunter Valley in southeastern Australia.
Introduction
At a time when there is a great deal of discussion in the
literature about the importance of
local knowledge of agriculture, very little has been published
on the local knowledge of
farmers involved in capital-intensive agriculture in
industrial societies. Apart from a few
papers calling attention to the need to take account of such
knowledge (Warren, 1994; Martin
and Lockie, 1993), the few relatively detailed studies of
local agricultural knowledge in
countries such as Canada, the USA and Australia have tended to
focus on relatively distinct
'communities' of farmers with specific traditions. Examples of
this sort of research include
Yoder's (1990) study of Amish farmers in Iowa, and MacKinnon
and Vass's (1989) study
of Prince Edward Island in Canada.
Many farmers in Canada, the USA and Australia are involved in a more or less distinct mode of agriculture which displays the following characteristics:
The Hunter Valley
The Hunter Valley is located inland from the port city of
Newcastle on the east coast of New
South Wales (Australia). Major agricultural industries include
dairy farming, broadacre
cropping (large-scale, capital-intensive cropping, mostly
monoculture) and both beef cattle
and sheep production. The Hunter Valley is also a noted
wine-producing area. Coal mining
is a major non-agricultural activity. The Hunter Valley is
considered to have some of the best
agricultural and grazing land in Australia. By Australian
standards, it was settled rather
early, the first farms having been established by the 1820s.
In recent years, awareness has grown that agricultural practices in Australia have often been quite destructive from an environmental point of view. In the Hunter Valley considerable concern has been voiced about the effects, or potential effects, of salinity on agricultural productivity. At one level the effect of mining on the salinity of the Hunter River and its tributaries has been a major concern. More recently there has also been concern about the dryland salinity of some agricultural land, as reflected in the presence of salt scalds. These are local landscape sites which display a significant loss of plant diversity and cover as a result of high concentrations of salt in the soil; they are found in low-lying areas and are usually attributed to the effects of the removal of native vegetation and the accompanying rise in the water table. According to one officer interviewed for the study, the Department of Water Resources regards the problem of dryland salinity as one of its main priorities.
The study
The research**1 concentrated mainly on
Merriwa District,
located some 90 kms inland from the mouth of the Hunter River.
Additional material was
gathered elsewhere in the Hunter region and on the Liverpool
Range, adjoining the Hunter
Valley to the North. Merriwa's economy is based largely on the
raising of sheep and beef
cattle. There is some cropping, including wheat and fodder
crops such as millet.
The study was concerned primarily with the dynamics of local knowledge, i.e., how it is generated and communicated. In order to obtain this type of information, in-depth interviews were held with farmers and farm families, as well as with officers from relevant government departments. The participants were purposely selected to include farmers known to have a concern with regard to salinity, farmers believed to have no such concern, farmers involved in a local Landcare group (formed specifically by farmers with an interest in sustainable agriculture), and farmers with some scepticism about such activities. The farmers were placed in the various categories by extension officers and other farmers, on the basis of the initial interviews. In general, the interviews took the form of lengthy informal conversations, in which several members of a farm family participated. Many interviews were conducted with both members of a farming couple (husband and wife) at the same time. All members of farm families are referred to here as 'farmers'. Approximately thirty farmers and five extensionists and consultants were interviewed.
The emergence of local knowledge of dryland
salinity
The interviews showed that it is only recently--perhaps in the
last ten years--that both farmers
and extension staff have recognized the existence of dryland
salinity. Some farmers
interviewed told of having first noticed some kind of soil or
fertility problem; this was
reported to agronomists, but they did not immediately
recognize the symptoms of dryland
salinity. Several farmers suggested that salinity had been
present for some time, but had
simply not been identified as such. It is clear from the
interviews that in recent years both
farmers and extensionists have become concerned about
salinity, and that the increased level
of reporting reflects this new awareness. Against this
background it is difficult to assess to
what extent salinity is a new phenomenon or merely one that
has been newly recognized.
Many farmers who had identified salinity on their land heard about the phenomenon from other farmers, from extensionists or from the literature, and then realized that it existed on their own land.
Reactions from farmers
The farmers expressed a range of different reactions to the
presence of salinity. Some
combined concern with enthusiastic efforts to learn as much as
they could about the problem.
One farmer had set up experiments to test whether certain
plants were able to grow in saline
soil. He also devised instruments to measure the depth of the
water table and the salt content
of the water, and actively encouraged other farmers and
extensionists to use these activities
as a focus for discussion. Another had got in touch with a
scientist interested in salinity, and
was able to combine technical insights into the causes of
salinity with his own observations.
He displayed a profound knowledge of water flows in the soils
under his land and the ability
of certain crops to absorb water and thus prevent the rise of
the water table.
Quite a different reaction which was also recorded was denial. One aspect of denial is concern about the potentially high costs of treatment. Some farmers believe that the reluctance of others to recognize salinity reflects embarrassment: having a salinity problem may be seen as evidence of poor farming skills. One thing that was extremely clear was that those farmers who were concerned with salinity were very reluctant to be critical of their neighbours or to interfere in their management practices. Even though the causes of salinity are frequently on another person's land, there was a strong ethical concern about the privacy of others and the importance of 'minding your own business'.
Another reaction was to recognize the existence of salinity without seeing it as a problem. Even farmers who were concerned with salinity pointed out that livestock liked the salt and that the areas affected really did not make much difference to productivity. This may indeed be a legitimate point. McGowan (1994) reports similar reactions to salinity among farmers in North Eastern Victoria.
Local knowledge and technical knowledge: Two sides of
the same
coin?
There are several important observations that can be made
about local knowledge on the basis
of this study. The first point is the dynamic nature of local
knowledge. Farmers did not learn
about salinity from earlier generations of farmers. The
problem is one that has been newly
recognized and the sources of information were varied, ranging
from expert advice, personal
observation, the reading of technical material, conversations
with neighbours, or
combinations of some or all of these sources. Whenever farmers
became concerned about
salinity, they used a variety of sources to learn more about
the phenomenon.
Secondly, the distinction between technical knowledge and local knowledge is not clear here. Farmers used technical sources and even carried out careful experiments to test their ideas. What distinguishes the two types of knowledge is the fact that local knowledge tends to be holistic and contextualized, whereas technical knowledge identifies general principles. The farmers used these general principles (such as the observation that certain types of tree cover affect the depth of the water table) to understand the local context, but they expressed greater concern about the specific characteristics of salinity on their own land than about the general principles. For example, they were concerned about the extent to which differing soil types and contouring on their land might lead to salinity in certain places. The two types of knowledge were compatible, and where there was a real difference, it was a matter of perspective. The local knowledge addressed specific situations of salinity, whereas the technical knowledge addressed more general--and thus more abstract--characteristics. Contrary to many of the assertions made about different forms of knowledge, the two were not opposing forms. Rather, both were incomplete and--as Kloppenburg (1991) says in his discussion of different forms of knowledge--complementary.
Another characteristic of the local knowledge was its holistic emphasis. There was a reluctance among farmers to treat technical issues as if they were distinct from social and economic factors. Farmers were concerned that solutions suggested by outsiders (often recommendations to plant trees) did not fit in with the economic realities with which they were faced: planting large numbers of trees is costly and may reduce crop production, whereas small areas of dryland salinity are not necessarily a problem.
The credibility of technical advice sometimes suffers, both because it is often unrealistic and because in the past it has been inconsistent. There was some resentment that twenty or thirty years earlier the extension agencies had been advocating the removal of trees to enhance production. The same agencies are now encouraging the planting of trees. A major theme emerging from this study was concern that knowledge (or beliefs) about farming should not be imposed. Even farmers who were highly concerned about salinity were reluctant to be seen to be 'preaching' to other farmers about farming practices. Farmers tend to prefer 'setting an example' to 'telling people what to do'. This suggests that the need--so often mentioned--to combine local and technical knowledge requires humility and a willingness to negotiate on both sides.
This study has shown that technical knowledge can stimulate the development of local knowledge focusing on environmental problems, and that technical and local knowledge can be complementary. One major implication of this is that agricultural extension may be most effective when it is interactive rather than directive.
Dr R.J. Fisher
University of Western Sydney
School of Agriculture and Rural Development
Hawkesbury
Bourke Street
Richmond
NSW 2753
Australia
Acknowledgments
This study was funded by an internal research grant from the
University of Western Sydney,
Hawkesbury. The conclusions discussed in this paper represent
the outcomes of many hours
of discussion among the members of a five-person research
team. The author wishes to
acknowledge the contributions of Judy Pinn, Peter Martin,
Donna Mack and Jane Wallis.
References
Kloppenburg, J. (1991) 'Social theory and de/reconstruction of
agricultural science: Local
knowledge for an alternative agriculture', Rural
Sociology 56(4):519-548.
MacKinnon, W. and E. Vass (1989) The best of the past: traditional sustainable agriculture in Prince Edward Island. Charlottetown (Canada): Institute of Island Studies, Extension Department, University of Prince Edward Island.
McGowan, C. (1994) 'The Indigo Valley Landcare group: Some factors which impede and enhance members' contribution to conservation and environmental management objectives.' Unpublished paper. Hawkesbury: University of Western Sydney.
Martin, P. and S. Lockie (1993) 'Environmental information for total catchment management: Incorporating local knowledge', The Australian Geographer 24(1):75-85.
Warren, D.M. (1994) 'Indigenous agricultural knowledge, technology and social change.' pp. 35-53 in McIsaac, G., W. Edwards and T. Riley (eds) Sustainable agriculture in Eastern North America. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Yoder, R.L. (1990) Amish agriculture in Iowa: Indigenous knowledge for sustainable small farm systems. Studies in Technology and Social Change 15. Ames (Iowa): Technology and Social Change Program.
Endnote
**1 The fieldwork for this study was
carried out in 1993.