The 11th European IFSA Symposium, Berlin 1-4 April 2014
Workshop 3.1 Soil management: facilitating on-farm mitigation and
adaptation
Conveners: Julie Ingram, Ana Frelih-Larsen, Jan Verhagen
Outline
• Significance of soil carbon • Management effects on soil carbon & yield • Science-practice gap – complexity • Science-practice gap – boundaries • Science-practice gap - credibility, salience legitimacy • SmartSOIL project approach, methods • Results • Conclusions
Significance of soil carbon
Soil productivity Soil health Resilience Ecosystem services
Mitigation
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Carbon content of soil is a major factor in its overall soil health and productivity. Soil organic carbon and soil organic matter are central to soil processes and to ecosystem services. The carbon content of soil affects physical, biological and chemical properties of soil and is a major factor in its overall health and productivity. Maintaining soil carbon stocks and reducing carbon dioxide emissions also contributes to climate change mitigation. The majority of these functions are closely linked to the stocks and flows of soil organic carbon.
Significance of soil carbon
• Impetus for policy makers and scientists to identify agronomic and soil management practices that can increase carbon stocks and optimise carbon use (flows)
• This is the aim of SmartSOIL
Presenter
Presentation Notes
There is an impetus therefore for policy makers and scientists in the agricultural context to identify agronomic and soil management practices that can increase carbon stocks and optimise carbon use (flows). This is something the scientific community is addressing.
The Simple Model of the SmartSOIL project considers the effects of field management on soil carbon and on crop growth (and crop yield). We know that the crop response to management depends on complex interactions between soil properties and soil functions (as seen in the dimmed box). This complexity makes it hard to communicate to practitioners and policy makers
Science-practice gap - complexity
• Complexity of soil carbon dynamics • Lack of consensus within the scientific community • Uncertainty - efficacy of different management practices
to enhance soil carbon & yield across different soil types, scales & climatic conditions
• Problematic to provide evidence of the positive effects of management practices
• Heterogeneity of soil & farming systems • Science inaccessible to the lay person (modelling,
language) • Context of climate change debates • Challenges in communication and implementation –
science- practice gap
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Bridging the gap between science and practice with respect to soil carbon management (and communicating about it) presents some particular challenges. Firstly, changes in soil carbon are small compared to the large stocks of carbon present in the soil, meaning that the change in carbon stock can be difficult to measure, presenting problems for monitoring, reporting and verification (Smith, 2012). It is problematic, therefore, to provide evidence of the positive effects of management practices. Secondly, due to the complexity of soil carbon dynamics and the heterogeneity of soil (and associated biophysical settings) and its responses to different managements, there is large uncertainty with regard to the efficacy of different management practices to enhance soil carbon across different soil types, scales and climatic conditions. Scientific debates concerning, for example, the value of reduced tillage for soil carbon (Baker et al., 2007) demonstrate this. Furthermore, there are misunderstandings within the scientific community about the role of soil carbon sequestration in climate change mitigation (Powlson et al., 2011). Thirdly, scientists tend to favour modelling to explain and predict carbon processes, and this methodology is not easily understood by outsiders. The science, therefore, is complex, in some cases lacks consensus and tends to be inaccessible to the lay person. All refs available in Ingram et al (in press)
8
there is a ‘prevalence of different norms and expectations in the two communities [experts and decision makers] regarding such crucial concepts as what constitutes reliable evidence, convincing argument, procedural fairness, and appropriate characterization of uncertainty’ Cash et al. (2003, p8086)
Science- action gap - concept of boundaries
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Notion of boundaries has been used to conceptualise the science- action gap between communities of experts and decision makers in science and technology (S&T) literature. See end for refs
9
Scientific information – likely to be more effective if perceived by stakeholders to be not only credible but also salient and legitimate Credible information - perceived by the users to be accurate, valid, and of high quality Salience -how relevant information is to the needs of the decision maker Legitimacy -perception that the production of information and technology has been respectful of stakeholders’ divergent values and beliefs
Science- action gap – credibility, salience legitimacy
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Credible information is perceived by the users to be accurate, valid, and of high quality. Relates to the nature of the knowledge and methods of its production and perceived validity Salience refers to how relevant information is to the needs of the decision maker Legitimacy reflects the perception that the production of information and technology has been respectful of stakeholders’ divergent values and beliefs Other scholars building on this work have looked at different criteria and thresholds for credibility, salience and legitimacy for effectiveness of joint knowledge production (Hegger et al., 2013) and boundary objects.
Context - SmartSOIL project
Two overall aims: • To identify farming systems and agronomic practices that
result in an optimised balance between crop productivity and soil carbon sequestration.
• To develop and deliver a decision support tool (DST) and guidelines to support novel approaches to different European soils and categories of beneficiaries (farmers, farm advisory and extension services, and policy makers).
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Smartsoil www.smartsoil.eu Aims to contribute to reversing the current degradation trend of European agricultural soils by improving soil carbon management in European arable and mixed farming systems covering intensive to low-input and organic farming systems
11
Linking soil carbon & crop productivity
Soil management
systems in Europe
DST & Guidelines
Economic appraisal of soil management
options
Improving knowledge LTEs & new experiments
Stakeholder involvement & dissemination
Applying knowledge
Case studies
Project approach
Presenter
Presentation Notes
For full project description see www.smartsoil.eu Consulting the farming community at different stages in the project to get feedback on research outputs is a key element of this project. Interviews and workshops are being held with advisors, farmers’ representatives and policy makers in six case study regions across Europe (see Ingram et al in press). These regions have been selected to represent a range of biophysical, farming system and socio-economic contexts. A preliminary consultation was undertaken in 2013 and the results are summarised below. Two workshops will be held to build on these inputs
Case study regions
12
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Stakeholder involvement & dissemination The project – 4 years, 12 partners in 9 countries, 2 of which are socio-economic experts. 6 cases study regions: Tuscany, Andalucia, Eastern Scotland, Masowieckie Poland, Közép-Magyarország Hungary, Sjælland Denmark Preliminary consultation with stakeholders - 60 interviews with advisers, farmer representatives and policy makers (10 in each case study)
13
Farmers know their practices well. Even if you put lots of effort in to convincing them that a certain practice will be good in the long term, I think this will be fairly ineffective. You have to break down barriers between research and day-to-day practice of farmers. Adviser, Spain
Results: Science- practice gap
Legitimacy Different
views, values, access
Salience Not seen as relevant to
farm business
Credibility Perceived lack
of scientific credibility
Even if the scientific community come to a consensus on best practice, it is likely that the practices defined will be so far removed from current practice that they won’t implement it. Adviser Spain
One of the problems is that there is so much uncertainly about C at the simplest level. It would be helpful to have consensus in scientific community first of all Researcher UK
Results
A German or an Austrian farmer
has more access to this kind of information Adviser Hungary
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Credibility debates about the efficacy of different practices for sequestering carbon and for crop productivity missing evidence heterogeneity of soil at a regional and at a farm scale is also a real concern for some researchers and advisors. Salience No relevance no demonstrable effect increasing awareness of other soil management issues due to regulation (e.g. cross compliance), soil carbon management is only indirectly related to this and does not fit within the frame of regulatory incentives in which farmers operate commercial incentive for farmers to consider managing carbon production-related decisions are taken in the short-term Talk about soil health or soil organic matter not soil carbon Legitimacy one-size-fits all approach to dissemination of project outputs is not appropriate. information which is too specific [i.e. soil carbon] and communicated as an isolated issue is doomed to failure’.
Results: Credibility
Even “experts” [advisers] don’t know which practice to recommend to farmers when they ask how can I conserve the quality of soil and mitigate climate change. The communication to the farmers is not necessarily the issue, more important, agree and display some clarity on “best practice. Adviser, Spain
At the advising level it is crucial to have a proof, an
evidence of the effects of a practice. Adviser, Italy It is essential to simplify the information [scientific
outputs]- in order to communicate a complex message to local situations. Adviser, Denmark
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Credible information is perceived by the users to be accurate, valid, and of high quality. Improve confidence in outcomes Communicate scientific certainty - provide evidence and demonstration of practices being recommended
• Little relevance • Farmers not convinced of cost effectiveness • No demonstrable commercial incentive- economic
benefits should be prioritised • Short term production-related decisions not
compatible with long term carbon management -needs to be relevant to the farmers’ timescale
• Soil carbon not in farmers’/advisers’ vocabulary • Farmers don’t deal with single issues
Results: Salience
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Salience refers to how relevant information is to the needs of the decision maker Farmer decision making (and hence the decisions of the advisors who support them) is largely driven by short term demands. This is not compatible with managing soil carbon which needs a long-term approach
Results: Legitimacy
• Stakeholder engagement reveals diverse nature of potential beneficiaries of the project outputs and the contexts they operate in – Different values, concerns, and perspectives – Different access to: PCs, broadband, access to advisers, – Different- age education, farming systems – Different contexts
• Develop a range of support formats to suit different users’ needs and preferences
• Continue (widen?) consultation
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Legitimacy - the perception that the production of information and technology has been respectful of stakeholders’ divergent values and beliefs and unbiased Enough commonality in results to suggest that the process in the project had been sufficiently thorough and fair but there are options to widen the consultation
Legitimacy Wider
consultation
Salience Reduced relevance
Credibility Tainted if too many
SH
increased legitimacy -negative effects on wider salience re-frames the issue in a way that is irrelevant to some stakeholders
‘Credibility is hard to establish in arenas in which considerable uncertainty and scientific disagreement exists, either about facts or causal relationships’. Cash et al. (2002, p4)
simplifying scientific inputs - compromises the credibility and usefulness of outputs
increased legitimacy - decreases credibility -science can be seen as being ‘tainted’ if too many SH bias the process e.g. soil tillage
Interaction –credibility, salience, legitimacy
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Soil carbon management is framed within climate change which itself is a subject of debate and contention, where credibility of scientific expertise and bias is continually questioned. Arguably, some respondents have emphasised this uncertainty and use this as a device to question credibility. There is a balance between the 3. Efforts to increase legitimacy by extending the consultation across six case studies may have negative effects on wider salience by re-framing the issue in a way that is irrelevant to some stakeholders; also it can be seen to ‘taint’ or distort the science if too many SH perspectives are included eg commercial interests Simplying messages to make them more salient reduces their scientific credibility
Conclusions
• Soil carbon significant to policy makers and scientists but
not to farming community • Science- practice gap exists • Credibility, salience and legitimacy - boundary features • Need to balance interactions