Poor and often illiterate villager farmers in Central America have been taught by World Neighbors programs to (a) establish and manage simple agricultural experiments with one variable, (b) measure accurately the results, and (c) report the results to the program and each other. The impact on the areas' yields of the technology thus generated, validated, spread, and/or locally adapted, has been significant. Although the situation there differs from that of the United States, and therefore the experimental design would differ, many of the principles and advantages of such a system would probably also apply in North America.

The research agenda for agriculture remains an important concern for anyone interested in the future of sustainable agriculture. Differences in opinion remain on both prioritization of topics and on how and where the necessary research should be done. The inferences are that the research strategies of the 1960's and 70's were not appropriate. If we truly “learn from each other,” we must consider what recent reports, models, and recommendations from written sources and individuals seem to be saying. Examination of these sources suggests a number of characteristics for the research that is needed: 1) Research which addresses problems regional in scope and which are often site specific; 2) research prioritization must involve a broader cross-section of opinions than ever before and include farmers, private non-profit organizations and scientists; 3) research must be more multidisciplinary and include farmers, extension faculty, and staff more directly; 4) systems research requires more emphasis and adoption f or progress in many areas; 5) basic principles and theory for many agricultural disciplines will need examination and eventual modification; and 6) on-farm research is an essential part of the total research effort. The final obligation for all of us is a vigilance to assure that the research done is always of the highest quality.

Complexity and rapid change in the agricultural industry are pushing us toward more participatory systems of information development and exchange. These changes are driven by a rapidly evolving information environment, with a multiplicity of sources and different clients, and by a technological revolution in communications equipment. At the same time, scientists and farmers are becoming increasingly aware of the complex biological interactions that occur in cropping systems and how these are connected with the overall ecosystem. We are expanding our time and space frame of reference. To address tomorrow's challenges, it will be important to blend the efforts in research and extension, to include farmers as full participants in the planning, execution, and interpretation of experiments, to explore new directions such as model farms and master farmers, and to develop creative educational approaches to encourage practical problem solving. Collaborative efforts of universities, industry, farmer groups, and environmental organizations will be needed to fully empower the individual farm manager to make rational and environmentally sound production decisions in the future.

U.S. land grant institutions currently follow? “top-down” model of research and extension in which farmers are the passive recipients of research results based on perceived needs which have been identified, prioritized, and investigated by scientists with little input from the end users. This exclusionary approach was designed to meet the needs of large scale, mono-cultural farming systems. However small scale, diversified, integrated systems are better served by a more participatory approach to research and extension in which farmers are actively involved as peers of researchers and extensionists in identifying research needs, designing and implementing experimental protocols, and delivering research results. This paper provides a brief outline of an alternative to the top-down approach termed “Farmers-First-and-Last”, developed and tested by Robert Chambers of the Institute of Developmental Studies, which has been effective in working with diversified farmers in developing countries.

Practical Farmers of Iowa is a grassroots organization whose members conduct research on profitable, environmentally sound alternative production methods on their own farms. The experimental design uses randomized, replicated side-by-side machine-harvested strips running the length of the field. Production techniques investigated include ridge tillage with and without herbicides, ridge tillage and conventional tillage without herbicides, with cover crops, and with late spring soil nitrate tests to determine efficient N application rates. This work has led to effective cooperation among farmers, extension personnel, and university researchers, and has inspired similar activities in other states.

Impediments to agricultural change extend beyond lack of appropriate research and the federal farm program to addiction to use of agricultural chemicals. Several recent trends in American agriculture have been caused by or have resulted in dependence on agricultural chemicals. They include the continuing separation of livestock from farms, farm size, separation of ownership and farming of the land, discontinuity of learned procedures, part-time farming, and certain aspects of noxious perennial weeds. This implies that prospects for agricultural change are related to the trends with which they are associated.

Farmers and the agricultural research and extension community at the land grant universities have experienced an evolving relationship. The current call for reform in publicly sponsored agricultural research and extension is built upon more than a century of dialog. If specialization and discipline-oriented research is to continue, the ecosystem-based knowledge of the farmer will become increasingly valuable. Involving farmers more actively in research and education could be achieved in several ways. Outside the land grant system, nonprofit agricultural research and demonstration organizations are being developed. Within the public system we need a renewed emphasis on extension at the local level and a revitalized applied research effort aimed at solving problems of the agricultural ecosystem rather than single disciplines. A dynamic and resourceful agriculture could result from including the farmer as a full partner in land grant research and education.

Farmer involvement in agricultural research is limited by inadequate funding, institutional policies and hierarchies, disciplinary specialization, and incompatible personalities. Additional barriers include academic emphasis on carefully controlled experiments, research priorities driven by personal interest, and farmers' reluctance to disclose trade secrets. Priorities for research conducted with public funds should be identified through a democratic process involving representatives from all sectors of agriculture. A broad, multidisciplinary, systems approach to agricultural research is needed; and farmers and researchers should consider long-term implications of projects. Better balance needs to be achieved between basic and applied research, and both should encourage innovation within the context of democratically determined research priorities. Opportunities abound for involving farmers in research as providers and recipients of information, as participants in determining priorities and ensuring practicality of methods, as collaborators and/or subjects for on-farm investigations, and as project evaluators. Farmers also need to take more initiative in getting involved in the political processes that set the stage for agricultural research.

Involvement of farmers in sustainable agricultural research can have important benefits, since farmers originated many sustainable agriculture innovations and can contribute a valuable perspective different from that of researchers. However, this does not mean, as is sometimes said, that all kinds of sustainable agricultural research necessarily should give farmers a major role—perhaps the dominant role—in choosing topics and overseeing the work. This belief overlooks the fact that farmers are just one of many groups that publicly supported research is supposed to serve and that their interests do not by themselves embody the full range of goals that sustainable agriculture tries to achieve. Moreover, although farmers can bring valuable insights to research, these alone will not be enough to insure that a sustainable agriculture research program has an appropriate mix of applied versus basic, short-term versus long-term, and component-level versus system-level studies.

The public agricultural research and extension system has provided the foundation for great improvements in U.S. agricultural production. However, our incomparable productivity has brought with it serious problems. These problems have also led to a rapidly changing perception about both agricultural scientists and today's conventional agriculture. Critics are placing high on the agenda of the agricultural research and extension establishment the need for alternative technologies that are more sustainable and less exploitative of our resources. The growing demand for alternative systems offers challenges for every part of the establishment-research and extension administrators, branch station/research center directors, and faculty. These challenges and how they should be met are discussed. Alternative systems will become the conventional agriculture of tomorrow.