Living Lab: Crop rotation between farms: Developing innovation support services and tools
Trøndelag County, Norway
Trøndelag County, Norway
The objective of the Norwegian Living Lab was to support the development of advisory methods and tools supporting cooperation between farmers for establishing more diverse crop rotations – both on individual farms and ‘shared’ between farms – by including more diverse combinations of different types of grain crop, temporary (sown) grassland, potatoes and/or vegetables.
Context, theme and target group
| The Living Lab was integrated as part of a Crop Rotation project organised by the Norwegian Agricultural Extension Service Trøndelag (a farmer owned cooperative). Advisors from the cooperative, plus farmers in the region, were the main target groups. |
| Trøndelag County is located in Central Norway and is one of the three most important regions for agriculture in the country with a total of 5,600 farms. Dairy farming and grain production are the most common agricultural activities. A significant proportion (31%) of the arable land in the county is used for grain production with specialised crop rotations typically including 85% barley, 10% oats and 5% wheat. Small areas of arable land are also used for potatoes and vegetables. |
| Crop rotations on individual farms in the region have tended to become very specialised and in some cases are simple monocultures. More diverse crop rotations are needed to a) improve soil fertility, plant health and yields; b) reduce the need of fertilizers and pesticides (and therefore costs), and; c) consequently produce economic benefit for farmers. One option for introducing additional crops into rotation is cooperation between neighbouring farms, especially where the neighbours are specialised in complementary crops. |
| For example, an arable farmer specialised in growing barley and potatoes that was located next to a dairy farm could introduce a crop of grass for silage into his / her rotation whilst their neighbour sowed barley or potatoes in one or more of their grass fields during the same period. |
Partner and responsible person contact
Ruralis
Egil Petter Stræte,
egil.petter.strate@ruralis.no
Gunn-Turid Kvam,
gunn.turid.kvam@ruralis.no
Ruralis works together with the Norwegian Agricultural Extension Service Trøndelag (Astrid Johansen, astrid.johansen@nlr.no)
The Living Lab story
The Living Lab started in autumn 2017. The initial activities of the Living Lab focussed upon establishing communication, building trust, and organizing working routines with the Crop Rotation project that the Living Lab was being integrated with.
| Three main ‘dialogues’ were developed between the participating farmers, advisors and researchers:The first dialogue was between advisors and farmers. Advisors contacted groups of farmers with experience in crop rotation with the aim of learning from them.The second dialogue was between researchers and farmers. During personal interviews and focus groups the researchers learnt about the most appropriate conditions for cooperating with the farmers and discussed potential elements of a new advisory service. The third dialogue was between advisors and researchers during meetings to a) share knowledge and experience from the dialogues they had with the farmers; b) reflect upon these experiences, and; c) discuss ideas and concepts for a new farm advisory service. |
| Unfortunately, the co-creation element of the Living Lab was delayed and not fully completed. This was due to a number of factors:The Crop Rotation project underwent a re-organisation involving new ownership, a new project leader and a reduction of budget and activities. This also impacted upon the Living Lab.The general lack of knowledge and experience with the Living Lab methodology limited progress with its implementation. The farm advisors and researchers were busy with other tasks and not always able to engage with the Living Lab.The Living Lab started well and adequate time was taken for all participants to get to know each other and to develop the necessary openness and trust. However, the Covid-19 restrictions from March 2020 stopped the Lab before the co-creation process could be completed. |
Lessons learned
| Existence of a problem or opportunity Participants in a Living Lab must recognize that something is a problem or that an opportunity exists to exploit. Without such recognition there is no basis for establishing a Living Lab and no motivation to engage with it. |
| Partnership and cooperation Participants in a Living Lab must recognize that co-operation between various partners has the potential to develop a solution to a problem or to take advantage of an opportunity. A Living Lab does not need to involve a broad partnership with many participants, but in some cases it will be necessary. |
| Motivation, engagement and ownership Participants must take ownership of the Living Lab process. Without this ownership, it is difficult to co-operate and make progress. A Living Lab must therefore be realistic to carry out and be designed / managed to address the real needs of the participants. If motivation is missing it may be necessary to adapt the Living Lab and focus on more relevant needs.Funding should ideally be in place before starting so that participants know they have a budget. All activities expected to be supported by this budget should be well defined. |
| Facilitation and cooperation A Living Lab needs the support of a facilitator with the necessary competence and independence to assist the participants, including those who have taken ownership of the work and/or responsibility for leading the process. Mutual trust is essential for effective cooperation with a facilitator. |
| Advisory service Establishing an advisory service for supporting cooperation between farmers for establishing more ‘shared’ crop rotations between farm was complex and demanding. Advisors required a) cross-disciplinary technical knowledge about the diverse crop rotation systems they were helping to develop; b) the skills and experience to establish and run group advisory activities, and; c) specific competence and tools to facilitate co-creation processes. |
More info about the Norway Living Lab (in English)
Practice Abstract 44 – How to make a Living Lab work in an agricultural advisory service
Practice Abstract 50 – Factors delaying co-creation and progress of a Living Lab
Info on Ruralis website:
- https://ruralis.no/en/2018/03/06/living-lab/
- https://ruralis.no/en/2017/01/13/new-eu-project-will-contribute-to-increased-knowledge-and-better-farm-advice-in-european-agriculture/
Blog post on AgriLink website: