Living Lab: Looking differently at sustainable maize cultivation together
Province of Noord-Brabant, the Netherlands & Flanders, Belgium
Province of Noord-Brabant, the Netherlands & Flanders, Belgium
The Dutch-Belgian Living Lab aimed to develop new advisory tools for improving the sustainability of maize growing for animal feed by: 1) changing the perspective of farmers, farm contractors and advisors regarding the risk of water pollution from nitrate leaching and 2) increasing their ability and willingness to take actions to reduce this risk. Broader perspectives on maize growing are needed to encourage a shift from short-term decision-making for field-specific solutions to long-term planning for more integrated whole farm management solutions..
Context, theme and target group
In the regions of Noord-Brabant and Flanders, agriculture consists mainly of intensive livestock production in combination with arable farming and horticulture. Maize is an important source of feed for the intensive dairy farms in the region and many farmers use contractors to manage its cultivation. Independent advisory services are provided by the Royal Agrifirm Group (https://www.agrifirm.com/Organisation/about-us/).
Due to changes in legislation and public perception the need to improve the sustainability of maize cultivation has increased considerably in recent years. However substantial uncertainty remains regarding the effect of farmers’ management practices on water quality, implementation of the legislation, and the feasibility of the solutions currently proposed.
The main stakeholders brought together in the Living Lab were farmers, advisors and farm contractors involved in maize cultivation in Noord-Brabant and Flanders. This included stakeholders already working together in the ‘Grondig Boeren met Mais’ project (https://www.grondigboerenmetmais.nl/) in The Netherlands.
Partner and responsible person contact
Wageningen University and Research
Jorieke Potters, jorieke.potters@wur.nl
Both Wageningen UR and Innovatiesteunpunt have considerable experience in supporting the uptake of more sustainable farming methods.
Innovatiesteunpunt
Melanie van Raaij, melanie.van.raaij@innovatiesteunpunt.be
The Living Lab story
| The Dutch AKIS is a very dynamic system coupling private extension services with state funding for research, plus different forms of public-private partnerships for the networking of AKIS actors. |
| The Living Lab was first established in the Netherlands based upon an existing network established in the ‘Grondig Boeren met Mais’ project (see above). The first step for the Living lab was a series of exploratory interviews with farmers, advisors and contractors about their perspective on maize cultivation and the challenges and opportunities for improving its sustainability. |
| The interviews gave a clear indication that a) the need to change existing methods of maize cultivation was perceived as being driven mainly by environmental legislation; b) consequently farmers and contractors showed little interest or urgency in making the necessary changes, and; c) farm advisors were playing a limited role in promoting more sustainable maize cultivation. |
| Nevertheless, three possible new ‘advisory tools’ were identified: A ‘catch crop’ decision support tool; Advisory tours to share experiences and practical insights on how to reduce the risk of nitrate leaching and protect water quality; A checklist for discussions between farmers, contractors and advisors before the maize growing season started – so-called “Sustainability at the kitchen table”. |
| The potential of these tools was further explored through follow up interviews, meetings with the stakeholders, a co-creation session, and three exchange visits between Belgium and Netherlands. A co-creation session was organised with interested stakeholders for development of the ‘catch crop’ decision support tool. However, although a similar interest existed amongst participants to develop the tool, it was not feasible to develop one single decision support tool for all farmers. Instead each farmer developed their own catch crop decision support. The advisory tour evolved from an organised bus tour visiting diverse farms, to measurements of nitrate in the fields of the farmers in the ‘Grondig Boeren met Mais’ network followed by a wider discussion. The checklist for kitchen table discussions for was found to be too formal for shaping the conversations that are needed between farmers, contractors and advisors. |
Lessons learned
| Engaging farmers It was difficult to actively engage farmers and advisors in the Living Lab process. Although the sustainable cultivation of maize is in the long-term interest of farmers, the pressure to change existing cultivation methods is not felt directly by farmers and is not perceived as an urgent issue. Pressure from legislation and public opinion is only felt indirectly. |
| Interest and exchange The stakeholders involved in the Living Lab were more interested to exchange experiences about agronomic practices than about advisory methods. It was therefore difficult to focus upon the main aim of the Living Lab to “develop new advisory tools for improving the sustainability of maize growing”. Furthermore, the key challenge for providing advice on sustainable agriculture did not seem to be a lack of appropriate tools or methods. Instead, it was simply the fact that sustainability was a low priority for all stakeholders involved. |
| Co-creation All stakeholders involved in the Living Lab identified the desirability of a decision support tool for catch crops. However, although an effective co-creation process was facilitated, it was not possible to develop one common tool in practice. This was for two reasons. More generally, during the co-creation session it was not possible for all participants (farmers, contractors and stakeholders) to agree on the content of the support tool because their individual interests pushed them in too many different directions. Specifically, the advisors involved in the process were mainly interested to build and maintain good relations with the farmers and this favoured the development of separate decision support tools tailored to the needs of individual farmers. |
| Setting and context Despite many common characteristics, it was difficult to create a meaningful connection between the Province of Noord-Brabant in the Netherlands and the region of Flanders in Belgium. In practice, the Living Lab was not able to ‘bridge’ the very specific contexts that existed since practical experiences from one context did not effectively translate to another. This suggests that Living Labs need carefully tailoring to context. Combining the Living Lab with the existing ‘Grondig Boeren met Mais’ project was both an opportunity and a threat. The project provided resources and an existing network of stakeholders, but the Living Lab was over-shadowed by the project and did not have enough visibility / attention itself. |
More information about this Living Lab (in English):
Practice Abstract 37 – How is design thinking used in the living lab? (Innovatiesteunpunt)
An article about this Living Lab (in Dutch)