Abstract

This research explores the co-design, co-development and implementation of a Regenerative Agriculture Mentoring Program (RAMP) that was co-produced in consultation with the agricultural industry and delivered to farmers. The program was highly successful in applying robust educational theory and practice into the agricultural industry in Australia to enhance farmers’ knowledge about approaches to agriculture that encourage greater resilience of the land given the current pressures of climate change. In addition, the program was then used to create a professional learning program for teachers to upskills in regenerative agriculture principles and practices to improve their teaching and learning in the classroom.

Research question

How can industry-based projects be used in educational contexts to enhance teacher knowledge and practice?

Objectives or purposes

• To co-develop, co-develop and implement an educational training program for farmers to transition to more sustainable agricultural practices.
• To transfer the knowledge and skills content of the industry-based program into educational contexts for teacher professional learning.

Perspective(s) or theoretical framework

There is a rapidly growing body of research that is demonstrating an urgent and "fundamental transformation in agriculture is needed" (Gosnell, Gill & Voyer, 2019, p. 2); primarily because the industry contributes an estimated 15 - 30% of greenhouse gases (GHG) (IPCC, 2019; OECD, 2016). It is projected that this could become 50% by mid-century without a targeted effort towards reducing the impact of agricultural practices. Key recommendations from extensive research, point to regenerative agriculture to address these issues for the future resilience of the planet (Gosnell, Gill & Voyer, 2019; Lal, 2020; Massy, 2020; Toensmeier, 2016). Regenerative agriculture is earmarked to effectively adapt to and mitigate the impacts of climate change. It adopts a systems framework to farming that extends beyond "minimising and reducing negative impacts" (Massey, 2020, p.10) to focus on "restoring, improving and enhancing the biological vitality, carry capacity and ecosystem services" (Electris et al., 2019) of the land, and our regions. 

Principally in line with Sustainable Development Goals number 2: Zero Hunger and  number 13: Climate Action, this paper accepts that "Australian farmers produce enough food to feed 80 million people, including 93 per cent of food consumed in Australia" (Stimpson et al., 2019, p.69). As a significant pillar of the national economy, the agricultural sector also makes a heavy footprint on the natural environment; from changing land and water practices to enhancing the impacts of climate change (OECD, n.d.). Agricultural contributions to climate change are estimated at approximately 25 per cent climbing to a forecasted 50 per cent by mid-century unless urgent and immediate action is taken (OECD, 2019). Furthermore, conventional agricultural practices have been found to be responsible for devastating, large scale global environmental problems and degradation including land use changes resulting in soil erosion, desertification, and climate change. "Transitions to more climate-friendly forms of agriculture [such as regenerative agriculture] have the potential to support ecosystem based adaptation to climate change as well as mitigation through soil carbon sequestration" (Gosnell, Gill & Voyer, 2019, p. 3; see also NGS, 2020; OECD, 2019). Further research affirms that, "global agriculture is already producing enough food to feed 10 billion people. However, about 30% of all food produced is wasted. It is thus important to break the vicious circle of produce, waste, degrade, pollute, and produce more. Therefore, the goal of RA [regenerative agriculture] is to apply the concept of more from less" (Lal, 2020, p.1A). Regenerative agriculture offers an alternative to traditional farming practices which addresses many of the environmental impacts described here.

Methodological approach and research design To align with the regenerative agriculture theory underpinning this paper, a participatory action research (PAR) approach has been adopted. PAR is grounded in collaboration approaches to undertaking research where participants are involved in experiential and transformative practice to address a known problem or issue (Conish et al., 2023). In this study, Australian farmers from two states were invited through email and social media networks to be involved in a program designed to enhance their knowledge of principles and on-farm practices in regenerative agriculture. The application and registration process included a consent form and a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire (Luke et al., 2021) to determine the baseline data of farmers current principles and practices across a range of different topics such as ground cover, rotational grazing, species diversity and soil structure. Participants who completed the survey were grouped into region-based groups of approximately 6 mentees (participants) and allocated a local and highly qualified and experienced mentor. The program was founded on the educational practice of mentoring; where group mentoring was enacted following a 6 or 12 month education-based outline. The program was co-designed and co-developed with education academics and experienced, well-known experts in regenerative agriculture and holistic management. Depending on the length of the program (6 or 12 months), mentoring groups met fortnightly or monthly on Zoom to discuss the topic presented in a purposefully created workbook. In addition, the program facilitated a number of expert webinar sessions and supported on-farm field days in collaboration with local government services such as local councils and land services. On completion of the program, participants were invited to complete the same questionnaire to find out how their thinking had changed around the principles and on-farm practices had changed as a result of the program. This was determined to be the measure of the transformational changes. The questionnaire had additional evaluative questions to determine the success of the education-based model too. The program was then used to create a professional learning program for teachers in regenerative agriculture – a topic yet to be covered in the national or state curriculum, but one that teachers are highly interested in. The program attracted 120 teachers registered and approximately 60 teachers completing the 6-week online program. The professional learning program did not form part of the formal research, but the evaluative data demonstrated the highly successful nature of the program.

Findings The data from the RAMP program was qualitatively analysed using thematic analysis. Six themes emerged from the data which demonstrated the success of the program in effectively and positively facilitating transformative change for farmers in regenerative agriculture principles and practices. In addition, the RAMP model of co-design and co-development with industry resulted in a successful approach for transferring the program into educational contexts for professional learning for teachers. The six emergent themes from the RAMP were: Regenerative Agriculture overall The results of knowledge change, represented as the percentage of participants with sound or very sound knowledge of the topic before and after the program, show significant improvements. Confidence Participants expressed confidence in making changes towards regenerative agricultural practices and principles. Practice change The program successfully influenced participants to embrace regenerative and sustainable agricultural practices, particularly in the realms of soil health and land management. These substantial shifts underscore a growing awareness among participants of the importance of environmentally conscious farming practices and a resolute commitment to long-term sustainability. Knowledge change The program has significantly enriched participants’ knowledge across various facets of regenerative agriculture, emphasizing the importance of biodiversity, grazing management, natural cycles, soil health, and ecological sustainability. Principles The results indicated participants’ average ratings on various regenerative agriculture principles before and after the program. Some principles saw a slight decreases in average ratings, suggesting participants’ perceptions may have shifted slightly in these areas. Program enjoyment Participants in the project found enjoyment and value in a combination of factors, including their interactions with peers, access to knowledgeable mentors, diverse learning opportunities, and the ability to apply regenerative agriculture principles to their unique contexts. The program’s supportive environment and practical approach were instrumental in promoting learning and instigating positive changes in participants’ farming practices.

References Cornish, F., Breton, N., Moreno-Tabarez, U. et al. Participatory action research. Nat Rev Methods Primers 3, 34 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-023-00214-1 Electris, C., Humphreys, J., Land, K., LeZaks, D., and Silverstein, J. 2019. Soil Wealth: Investing in regenerative agriculture across asset classes. Croatan Institute, Delta Institute, The Organic Agriculture Revitalization Strategy. General Mills. 2020. Regenerative agriculture. Accessed from: https://www.generalmills.com/en/Responsibility/ Sustainability/Regenerative-agriculture Gordon, L. & Gordon, E. (2020). What are the principles of regenerative agriculture? The Land. Retrieved from: https://www.theland.com.au/story/6912797/what-are-the-principles-of-regenerative-agriculture/ Gosnell, H., Gill, N., & Voyer, M. (2019). Transformational adaptation on the farm: Processes of change and persistence in transitions to ‘climate-smart’regenerative agriculture. Global Environmental Change, 59, 101965. Kughur, Gyanden & Audu, O. (2015). Effects of Intensive Agricultural Production on the Environment in Benue State, Nigeria. CAB Reviews Perspectives in Agriculture Veterinary Science Nutrition and Natural Resources. 8. 7-11. 10.9790/2380-08810711. Lal, R. (2020). Regenerative agriculture for food and climate. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 75(5), 123A-124A. Luke, H., Baker, C., Allan, C., McDonald, S., & Alexanderson, M. (2021). Agriculture in the northern wheatbelt: Rural landholder social benchmarking report 2021. Southern Cross University. https://soilcrc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Northern-Wheatbelt-Social-Benchmarking-Report_16_05.pdf Massy, T. (2020). Blueprint for Impact: Regenerating agriculture across the Great Barrier Reef catchments. Report commissed by Sustainable Table. Mózner, Z., Tabi, A., & Csutora, M. (2012). Modifying the yield factor based on more efficient use of fertilizer—The environmental impacts of intensive and extensive agricultural practices. Ecological Indicators, 16, 58-66. Rhodes, C. J. (2017). The imperative for regenerative agriculture. Science Progress, 100(1), 80-129. Rogers, Everett M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press. pp. xv–xxi. Stimpson, K., Luke, H., & Lloyd, D. (2019). Understanding grower demographics, motivations and management practices to improve engagement, extension and industry resilience: a case study of the macadamia industry in the Northern Rivers, Australia. Australian Geographer, 50(1), 69-90. Toensmeier, E. (2016). The carbon farming solution: a global toolkit of perennial crops and regenerative agriculture practices for climate change mitigation and food security. Chelsea Green Publishing