Northeast Training - Support Network for Agriculture Development

Northeast Training - Support Network for Agriculture Development

Summary

Summary
This project strengthens the community and regional infrastructure for agriculture in the Northeast by enhancing the skills of Cooperative Extension and other professionals. Twenty-four practitioners from nine states participated in a training, formed study teams to investigate and evaluate agriculture development projects and to produce findings, evaluative tools, and other products. A regional Agriculture Development Symposium drew 200 development professionals, farm advocates, and others. The trainees developed new skills and relationships, and the region benefits from the formation of a network of agriculture development specialists. In addition, agriculture development is more integrated into local and regional economic development activities.

Objective
To provide in-depth training and intensive cross-learning experiences in community-based and regional agriculture development to a group of 24 to 30 Cooperative Extension, USDA, NGO, state, and local agency staff, along with farmers from around the Northeast.

To develop the capacity of participants to critically evaluate their own agriculture development programs in terms of economic, environmental, and social impacts.

To provide additional training, networking support, information, and documented case examples of agriculture development to up to 400 Northeast Cooperative Extension, USDA, NGO, state and local agency staff.

Approach:
* An Ag Development electronic list serve and website were created to offer a forum for professional dialogue and public access to agriculture development information, project profiles, and study team products developed by Northeast Training and Support Network (NETSN) leaders.

* 24 NETSN leaders were recruited from throughout the Northeast and received three days of training. They the formed four study teams that focused on beginning farmers, public education campaigns, agriculture and smart growth, and farmers’ markets. The teams gathered information on existing projects in these topic areas and identified indicators and assessment tools to evaluate their economic, social and environmental impacts.

* A regional Agriculture Development Symposium drew 200 agriculture development practitioners, community development specialists, planners, agency and grassroots representatives, farmers, and farm advocates to presentations, workshops, working sessions, and informal networking. Each team presented its findings, and a workshop related to each study team topic expanded the learning opportunities.

Results
The NETSN leaders strengthened their understanding of economic development and developed an appreciation of the three-legged stool of sustainability—economic, environmental and, social—as it applies to agriculture development projects. They also built skills in assessment and evaluation.

The Public Education Campaigns (PEC) team collected profiles from eight Northeast PECs, produced an in-depth case study on one PEC, and a handbook on evaluation strategies and techniques for agriculturally based PECs. The Beginning Farmer team produced profiles on five Northeast beginning farmer programs and drafted a set of social, economic and environmental indicators used at their field visit to the Ecosystem Farm at Accokeek Foundation. The Ag and Smart Growth team produced a website, www.SmartAg.net. The Farmers’ Market team produced a report, a bibliography on farmers’ markets, and a survey instrument to assess the economic, environmental, and social impacts of a downtown market on the farmers and the community.

Two hundred people received information about agriculture development. Each received a binder of study team products and other information about the symposium workshops and the NETSN project. They exchanged resources and networked.

Impacts and Potential Contributions
The project increased the visibility and legitimacy of agriculture development and promoted the importance of integrating agriculture development with traditional economic and community development initiatives by seeing agriculture as vital economic activity for the region. The project created a network of agriculture development specialists with new skills, and the participants are more able to provide effective leadership for a wide range of community-based and regional agriculture development opportunities. They have a greater sense of professional identity and collegiality from the shared experiences of the training and the team projects.

Project narrative
* Ag Development list serve and website. At the start of the project, the FAP-NE-AG-DEVEL-L list serve was set up and has been in active use ever since. About 150 subscribers share information, discuss of issues, and professional development opportunities focused on agriculture development. Most subscribers are from the northeast region, but not all. The NETSN web site was developed to provide public access to the huge array of agriculture development information and project profiles developed by NETSN participants. It is located at http://www.cals.cornell.edu/dept/ruralsoc/fap; click on “Northeast Training and Support Network.”

* Leaders Group Recruitment and Training. In the fall of 1999, 24 participants for the NETSN leaders group were recruited from throughout the Northeast. Leaders were selected for their diversity and represented experienced local agriculture development specialists, Cooperative Extension and USDA field staff, state and local agency staff, NGO representatives, private sector consultants, and others working in local and regional agriculture development. Leaders wrote up one or more project profiles detailing their recent or current agriculture development work, identifying participating organizations, funding sources, outcomes, and lessons learned.

The group met in March of 2000 for three days of information sharing, skills building, and planning. At the training, several existing agriculture development projects were critiqued. Leaders discussed why and how the social, economic, and environmental impacts of agricultural development projects ought to be evaluated. An enormous amount of cross-learning among participants took place.

* Study Team Investigations. During the training, the group organized itself into four study teams to focus on particular approaches to agriculture development over the next eighteen months. The topics selected for investigation were beginning farmers, agriculturally-focused public education campaigns, agriculture and smart growth, and farmers’ markets. The four teams spent the remainder of the first year of the project developing a plan of work and budget, gathering information on projects around the region that use these approaches, and identifying indicators and assessment tools to evaluate the economic, social and environmental impacts of these approaches. In the second year, each study team implemented its plan of work. Originally it was envisioned that each team would host a study tour to reach out to a larger audience, but in designing the plans of work, some teams selected other options.

* The beginning farmer study team investigated several beginning farmer service programs and compiled summary reports. Each investigation was shaped by a set of questions generated by the team about the project or program and its economic, social, and environmental impacts. In April of 2000, the team also made a site visit to the Ecosystem Farm at Accokeek Foundation in Maryland, a non-governmental, site-based farmer training program under the direction of Shane LaBrake. Team members interviewed Shane and his three farmer-trainees and toured the farm and facilities. They also interviewed the foundation president, board members, and staff about their investment and success in serving beginning farmers.

* The public education study team gathered profiles on several public education campaigns, specifically grassroots buy-local campaigns and state-run marketing campaigns. They gathered background information and identified people in the Northeast who conducted and assessed these campaigns. About 20 people convened in Millbrook, New York for a day-long meeting that which included a training component about marketing campaigns and evaluation tools.

* The farmers’ markets study team initially proposed to study farmers’ markets, both tailgate and permanent, but the scope of study proved to be unmanageable. Instead, they concentrated on developing a tool to evaluate the economic, social, and environmental impacts of farmers’ markets. The team members collected background information—an exhaustive bibliography on farmers markets—and developed a series of questions. They made a site visit to the Millburn, New Jersey farmers’ market where they interviewed market farmers, customers, and the market manager, and convened a meeting with town officials to get their perspective. They produced a report of their findings.

* The agriculture and smart growth study team began with an investigation of available studies and materials on growth management and agriculture. Confirming their intuition, there was very little conceptual or practical connection between agriculture development, farmland protection, and growth management at local, regional, and state levels. They decided to create a web site on agriculture and smart growth with information about the role of agriculture in growth management, with links to organizations and other sites.

* Northeast Agriculture Development Symposium. The culmination of the project was the Agriculture Development Symposium, held in Albany, New York on November 9 and 10, 2000. The symposium drew 200 agriculture development practitioners, community development specialists, planners, agency and grassroots representatives, farmers, and farm advocates to presentations, workshops, working sessions, and informal networking. Each team presented findings, and a workshop related to each study team topic was offered.

Results
The NETSN leaders group. From the intensive training about agriculture economic development, NETSN team members focused on identifying and building skills needed by agriculture development practitioners and on how to evaluate the economic, social, and environmental impacts of our agriculture development efforts. Team members strengthened their understanding of the scope and depth of agriculture economic development and developed an appreciation of the economic, environmental, and social indicators of sustainability. They built skills in assessment and evaluation. As a group, they grappled with concepts of agriculture economic development as they hoped to approach; at the end of the training the NETSN leaders were generally in agreement that our orientation was toward local and regional solutions, adding value and increasing market share, integrating agriculture’s multiple benefits, and building social capital rather than toward global competitiveness, maximizing production, and building technical solutions. For some, this was a substantial shift in orientation.

The group concluded that for the Northeast, effective agriculture development strategies improve the economic sustainability of farming while providing environmental and social benefits to the community and region.

The March 1999 training focused on concepts of indicators and impacts. As a result, leaders became familiar with more sophisticated approaches to evaluating projects. For example, one indicator of success is the a focus on long-term sustainability, not just short-term effects; another is to measure social capital as well as producers’ bottom lines. This understanding carried over into the teams’ investigation of projects and into their work in general.

Study team finding. The PEC study team collected and synthesized profiles from eight northeast PECs. They produced an in-depth case study on one PEC, and a handbook on evaluation strategies and techniques for agriculture-based PECs. Which included a chart of impacts and indicators and description of evaluation techniques. The beginning farmer team produced profiles on five northeastern beginning farmer programs. They drafted a set of social, economic, and environmental indicators used at their field visit to the Ecosystem Farm at Accokeek Foundation. They created a listing of selected web sites related to beginning farmers. The agriculture and smart growth team produced a web site, www.SmartAg.net, with five sections and links. The farmers’ market team produced a bibliography on farmers’ market, and a listing of relevant web sites. They also produced a survey instrument to assess the economic, environmental, and social impacts of a downtown market on farmers and the community and compiled the results into a report that also includes background information on farmers markets.
In each case, the teams did background research and collected profiles. Three teams developed participatory tools to identify indicators and impacts. Two teams conducted program assessments/surveys. All team products and findings were carried on the web site.
Symposium Participants. Two hundred people received information about agriculture development that focused on the Northeast. Each received a binder of study team products and other information about agriculture economic development, the symposium workshops, the NETSN project, and supporting materials. Project findings were disseminated and discussed. The network of professionals engaged in agricultural economic development was acknowledged and expanded.

Impacts
One of the major overall impacts of this project was to place agriculture economic development on the radar screen of a wide variety of professionals. The project increased the visibility and legitimacy of agriculture development; it also stressed the importance of integrating agriculture development with traditional economic and community development initiatives by seeing agriculture as vital, with multiple benefits for the region.

Another important impact was the creation of a network of agriculture development specialists. As a result of this project, participants can provide effective leadership for a wide range of community-based and regional agriculture development opportunities. They have a greater sense of professional identity and collegiality, developed from the shared experiences of the training and the team projects. In the words of one NETSN leader, “[T]here is no question in my mind that I will be able to better serve the people in my region through what was learned … [and from] the people that are networked.” They increased their skills to evaluate their own agriculture development projects and programs. They also developed virtual teamwork skills by working with team members at a distance from across the Northeast to accomplish the work plans. This project strengthened the capacity of two dozen professionals from a wide variety of settings to bring newly acquired skills and awareness to those settings, thereby creating a ripple effect throughout the rest of their organizations.

The NETSN leaders group crafted a consensus statement on the intended impact of agriculture development as they envisioned it for the Northeast. The vision was:

* to expand opportunities for natural resource-based community economic development

* to build, diversify and enhance markets for local production

* to retain, expand and protect farmland and the natural resource base

* to strengthen public awareness of agriculture and build supporting communities

This vision of agriculture development is resonant with the principles of sustainability. Rather than focus on international trade, for example, or commodity-based development, the leaders stressed factors such as quality of life, environmental factors, community infrastructure, and long-term security. These values are embedded in each of the study team’s investigations and in the tools they developed to assess impacts. This approach presented considerable challenges, as it is much more difficult to develop indicators of environmental and social impacts than to examine bottom lines, volumes of produce, or numbers of participating farmers.

With the exception of the agriculture and smart growth team, which focused on the development of a web site, the teams engaged members of the community in their participatory studies. Farmers, grassroots organizers, municipal officials, organization and agency staff, and citizens learned about agriculture development concepts and assessment. As a consequence of their participation, they are more likely to advocate for and develop viable programs to support agriculture. They are better able to participate in the design and evaluation of agriculture development initiatives founded on principles of sustainability.

As a consequence of their participation in this project, the leaders gave evidence of shifts in their thinking about agriculture development. Participants from land-grant institutions and state agencies were exposed to approaches favored by grassroots community development groups, while participants typically engaged in local action were influenced by projects implemented at the regional level.

Because partnership approaches were emphasized, participants were exposed to models of effective agriculture development partnerships, such as among an RC&D, a state department of agriculture, and a non-profit. Also, the exposure and exchange across disciplines was a highlight for many of the NETSN leaders. Several leaders used the term “eye opener,” referring to their experience in this project. The project did help participants become more sensitive to the environmental and social consequences of various agriculture development models and initiatives.

Because, by definition, agricultural economic development happens at the community or regional level, it is very difficult to assess the extent to which this project directly impacted farm production levels, farm-level quality of life, or farm profits. We could safely say, however, that as a consequence of this project, professionals engaged in a wide variety of agriculture development activities will be more sensitive to sustainability, and that their projects are more likely to consider the interrelationships among impacts beyond the bottom line. Professionals are also more likely to think and plan in a more holistic and integrated way, within the food system and beyond.

For example, the agriculture and smart growth team created links that were previously non-existent among agriculture development, growth management, and farmland protection interests; now regional planners and open-space conservationists will be much more likely to act on the understanding that a viable agriculture economy is one of the best open-space preservation tools.

In another example, the PEC team’s guide to assessing public education campaigns articulates important links between encouraging consumers to buy local food and encouraging other behaviors such as supporting local bylaws that are favorable to farmers or supporting bond bills for the acquisition of agricultural easements.

Two of the challenges in the design of this project were with geography and the time commitments of the NETSN leaders. Because the study teams were composed of participants from throughout the region, it was not feasible for them to meet as study teams. So all planning and implementation took place via e-mail and phone, which made coordination and sustaining momentum difficult. Also, while participants were committed to the project, they were not compensated for their time; with everyone’s busy schedules, it required extra time on the part of the project coordinators to keep things moving. Study teams identified team leaders and treasurers, and those folks put in extra time as well. Three of four teams hired students or professionals to assist them with document preparation.

Several participants expressed disappointment that there wasn’t more actual training and the project would have been strengthened by a better balance between the team and field work, and by more hands-on training and development of assessment tools.

Areas needing further study
Based on the success of the project, feedback from the leaders’ group, symposium evaluations, and list serve dialogue, there appears to be a need to continue to provide support, training and networking infrastructure for the region’s agriculture development specialists. Suggested areas for further activity include:

* a biennial conference focused on agriculture economic development; sponsorship could be rotated among land grant institutions, in partnership with community-based and other organizations focused on agriculture economic development

* targeted regional or sub-regional professional development trainings

* outreach and networking to other related sectors (e.g. northeast members of the National Association of Agricultural Marketing Officials, community development corporations)

* further use of electronic technologies for information-sharing and distance learning

* mini grants for teams to investigate agriculture development initiatives, replicating the NETSN model

* further promotion of agriculture economic development as an integral element of local and regional economic development strategies, and further promotion of agriculture development as a professional niche

It is clear from this project that additional awareness about agriculture development among professionals, the farming community, and the public is essential. At the same time, professionals engaged in agriculture development need more tools to assess the efficacy of development projects, particularly tools that address the three elements of sustainability. This project offered an important step in that direction. NETSN leaders encouraged the establishment of a more permanent network infrastructure for agriculture development specialists, specifically supporting the hiring of a coordinator and establishing a coalition of NETSN partners.

Outreach
* All study team products were posted on the NETSN page of the Cornell Farming Alternatives Program web site.

* Publicity for the Agricultural Development Symposium included five regional and national list serve postings and a brochure mailing to a list of 500, including state departments of agriculture, extension professionals, planning agencies, and farm organizations. Notices were also posted on the NETSN web page.

* Symposium participants received a binder that included extensive information about NETSN and general information about agriculture development, and the products of each study team’s investigations. The binder also included abstracts from the workshop presenters.

* Information and updates about the project were reported in newsletters, including the Farming Alternatives Program newsletter and NESAWG NEWS.

Reported February 2001

Collaborators: