By Krisy Gashler
Where did the idea for this kind of farmer-led research come from?
Longchamps: As a graduate student, I observed that weed problems in many farm fields were patchy but farmers were spraying everywhere. I thought perhaps there was an opportunity to save herbicides by spraying only where they were needed – saving money for growers and reducing environmental harms. I did agronomic engineering, developed optical sensors, created ways to map your weeds and strategies to do spot spraying of weeds. But when I presented my findings to growers, I found that weeds were not their top priority at that time, and my project was quite disconnected from the reality of their most-pressing problems. It was a big realization, and I decided I wanted to flip it all around. Now, I put all this technology, all the analytics and expertise, to the service of farmers when they are experimenting with something. Because if they are experimenting on a topic, that means it is important for them to progress toward their vision and objectives. I didn’t pioneer this concept, but I’ve been part of conversations with many colleagues across Europe, Australia, South America, and the U.S. about expanding this research model.
Rohrbaugh: I think what differentiates on-farm experimentation from more-normative kinds of research is the perspective you bring to the table, and the acknowledgement that there are multiple kinds of knowledge. Farmers know their land better than a scientist ever could, while they may have specific questions that scientists are better able to answer. It’s a skill-share.
Logistically, how do you support growers’ experiments?
Longchamps: A lot of farmers will do an experiment, but then they lose the capacity to keep an eye on it, or they may end up not collecting any data for a more thorough interpretation of their results.
Source : cornell.edu