This article was written by Jennifer Cook, Digital Green fellow for eXtension
Digital Green is a global non-profit development organization that empowers smallholder farmers to lift themselves out of poverty by harnessing the collective power of technology and grassroots-level partnerships. They partner with extension actors in developing countries to solve problems like market access, farmer training, and rural nutrition education using digital technology. Digital Green developers build cutting-edge software, such as mobile apps and online data collection and analysis, to benefit farmers worldwide.
Community video approach
One solution offered by Digital Green is the community video approach, using peer learning and human-mediated discussion to help disseminate farming or other skills. In this approach, a community member is trained in video production and facilitation skills. Once trained, videos are produced staring local farmers, on topics needed in the community.
The magic of this approach happens in the dissemination. Local farmers or others come together to watch the video. The new practice or idea is more accepted because it is explained by their peer in the video. The video is paused frequently and a facilitated discussion engages the group, allowing time for the idea to become clear. This solution enables consistent and quality information to reach farmers, many of whom are illiterate, in a cost-effective and scalable manner.
Finally knowledge gained and behavioral changes are collected and maintained on a database called CoCo (Connect online Connect offline). CoCo works well in areas where internet connectivity is a challenge, and enables near real-time data analytics on farmer behavior.
Where might this solution work in the US?
Videos and YouTube are plentiful in the US. The community video solution has created a formula for video production, facilitation, and dissemination of educational material. We are all so busy and many times asked to do more with less. This solution can be a tool to build capacity at scale, as the videos can also be used as training material for extension agents as well as farmers.
Digital Green’s video-enabled approach might work in places where language or cultural differences create a challenge for disseminating new ideas. For example, the community video approach has been proposed to be used to teach refugee farmers about food safety practices at an incubator farm in Northern California.
Interested in working with Digital Green on implementing this solution in your area? Contact Digital Green eXtension fellow Jennifer Cook jennifer.cook@colostate.edu
This article was written by Jennifer Cook, Digital Green Fellow for eXtension.
For the past nine months, I served as the Digital Green eXtension fellow, interviewing many small and beginning farmers, farm groups, and farm partners from across the US, to understand the challenges small farmers face. Representing Digital Green, a global non-profit development organization, I was looking for gaps in the ways in which farmers are supported by both public and private actors.
A topic that kept coming up in interviews and in my research is the economics of farming. Small farms, defined as those making less than $350,000 gross farm income, are more likely to have an operating profit margin in the red zone, 59-78% of them according to USDA, ERS (2016). It is the passion for farming that drives farmers to continue farming, often not income.
Perhaps it’s this economic challenge that has reduced the number of beginning farmers in the US? In 1982, 38% of farmers were beginning (less than 10 years in operation), in 2012 only 17.2% were beginning farmers (USDA, ERS 2012). We need a new generation of farmers to support local and sustainable food systems, provide jobs, and maintain open space and wildlife habitat in our communities. New farmers and farmland should be encouraged and supported.
Beginning farmer story highlights challenges
Chris and her husband Shawn have always wanted to be farmers. They learned how to grow mushrooms and vegetables and began selling at their local farmers’ market. A few years later they bought some farmland, expanded their production, and diversified to berries, honey, vegetables, and more varieties of mushrooms.
Chris and Shawn’s farm products are now in high demand, but they both work off-farm jobs and can’t afford to quit to be full-time farmers. Finding dependable and proficient farm labor has been a challenge so they continue to do all the work themselves.
They are at a crossroads, having invested a lot in land, equipment, and infrastructure, but still not seeing much profit when they consider all their own labor and transportation inputs. Chris and Shawn need to earn a profit by either cutting costs or increasing revenues. Are there ways that they can find inexpensive and proficient labor? Should they rework their business plan to explore other profit avenues? Should they cut their losses and quit farming or continue to invest in their business?
How can Extension agents support the business of farming?
Small farms, such as Chris and Shawn’s, make up 90% of farms in the US (USDA ERS, 2016). How can farming be more economically sustainable for small and beginning farmers? What solutions (tools, technology, resources) can help mitigate some of the major challenges that beginning and small farmers face in the US?
Farmers must be market savvy. What tools and resources, such as enterprise budgets and price points, are available, or could bedeveloped to help farmers make informed business decisions?
Farming has a lot of risk. What risks, such as investment of land, water, and equipment could be mitigated to encourage farming? Incubator farms and food hubs are models that have worked.
How can farming be more economically sustainable for small and beginning farmers? The solutions are often situation-specific. Options include sharing assets in the community or decision-making based on understanding of individual farm budget and hidden costs of transportation and labor.
How can we as Extension agents guide new farmers toward being more business savvy? In Colorado, we offer a Building Farmers Program where farmers are guided to develop a business plan and understand wholly the economics and business of farming. The program is helping new and beginning farmers assess their ability to start and maintain a new farm or expand and improve an existing one. What programs and types of assistance are working in your state?
Andaman Islands coral reef. Photograph by Ritiks, distributed under CC BY-SA 3.0 license @ https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Coral_Reef_at_the_Andaman_Islands.jpg
Emergent by Design: Solutions Creating More Solutions
Over several previous posts1 I’ve written about why Cooperative Extension and the Land Grant system as a whole might (and in some cases already has begun to) embrace a more network-centric approach, enabling it to better facilitate the co-creation of knowledge and solutions which are both locally-grounded and research-informed. As well as helping it become more of a “system which learns”, continually adapting its fit to a changing world with greater responsiveness to issues like equity, inclusion and sustainability. Implying that:
A network-centric organization is both a sensible response to a complex environment and an enactor of sensibility on that environment.2
I explore these themes further here within the broader context of systems oriented approaches to complex problems, and the role “socio-technical systems” and platforms can play in supporting such capabilities. I also touch on the implications this has for institutions and programs seeking to support healthy, resilient people, communities and food systems.
Approaching Wicked Problems through a Complexity Lens
The term wicked problem, a complex problem for which there is no simple solution, or even agreement on what the problem really is, was first popularized in a 1973 article Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning4 by Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber. In it they differentiate between “tame”, solvable problems and those with many complex interdependencies and changing requirements, with the latter requiring a much different approach than has been taken in the past. They state:
The classical paradigm of science and engineering -the paradigm that has underlain modern professionalism -is not applicable to the problems of open societal systems, problems inherently wicked.
Originally presented from the perspective of social policy planning the term has since been used to describe a host of modern challenges. That includes many Cooperative Extension and the Land Grant system as a whole are concerned with such as the “triple burden of malnutrition” (overnutrition, undernutrition or micronutrient deficiencies), invasive species and pest outbreaks, growing wealth disparities and climate change.
Addressing the root causes and not just the symptoms of such issues requires an understanding of the complex systems from which they arise. Several transformative areas of scientific inquiry (illustrated below) arising over the last several decades are helping shed light on these.
A history of complexity science, by Brian Castellani. Click to enlarge. Distributed under CC BY-SA 3.0 license @ Wikipedia: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Complexity_Map.svg
Drawing from, informing and linking several disciplines (including network science) this work is helping reveal and model the dynamic structures and relationships of a variety of different complex systems, such as cities, ecosystems, networks of neurons, social networks, power grids, and the internet. It’s been found these can give rise to “emergent” behaviors or intelligent structures (like bird swarms and termite mounds) not easily explained or predicted when looking solely at the aggregate abilities of their constituent elements, which might be quite limited at the individual level. Essentially systems where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
Complexity science is also concerned with how those systems interact with their larger environment (often as nested, linked or overlapping systems of systems). Insights are now leading to the development of human designed systems like “robot swarms” exhibiting emergent behavior or “swarm intelligence” mimicking that found in the natural world.
Complex Adaptive Systems
Research in these areas has led to the recognition of complex adaptive systems (CAS), collections of entities or “agents” whose patterns of interaction over time can feed back on the system in a way which informs future interactions. That includes emergent responses to a changing environment which can increase survivability of the macro-structure, as well as the self-organizing processes which give rise to such responses. Because these processes are distributed and spontaneous, the system is typically better able to survive or self-repair than one dependent on top down or external control/resources.
Most relevant to my investigations1, the study of complex systems is also revealing reoccurring patterns in what could be called healthy or “fit” systems, including agrifood systems. These can exhibit the ability to 1) maintain functionality without fundamental changes (robustness), 2) recover or bounce back to a previous state (resilience), or 3) change (adapt) in the face of challenges, with examples found in a variety of social, ecological and technological situations. Systems able to maintain a balance of factors contributing to both resilience and efficiency, optimized for health and sustainability are said to exist within a “Window of Vitality”.
Land Grant Applications
So how might we consciously apply these principles to Land Grant institutions and programs? What are we to do when we realize that more often than not, the systems which we depend on and support are doing exactly what they were “designed” to do (intentionally or by default), sometimes at the expense of overall goals related to public health and well-being (possibly even while realizing individual programmatic outcomes)?
A 2014 book by Patricia Auspos and Mark Cabaj from the Aspen Institute Roundtable on Community Change, Complexity and Community Change: Managing Adaptively to Improve Effectiveness5, applies complexity science to the world of place-based community change efforts. Building on the work of Bill Traynor (mentioned in my last post, in regards to creating environments of connectivity), and others, it states:
A complexity perspective emphasizes the interrelated and systemic nature of issues…responses to the underlying issues may be less fragmented, more strategic, and more sustainable if they are linked and integrated across programs, organizations, systems, sectors, and areas of activity… The potential to generate cross-domain effects helps to bring stakeholders together around a common vision.
They argue that community change actors experience complexity in two ways: by addressing complex problems and by working within complex adaptive systems. Their efforts can be improved by looking at problems (the book uses food deserts as one example) through the lens of complexity and employing adaptive leadership and management approaches (also mentioned in my last post).
Political scientist Jenna Bednar uses a complex adaptive systems lens in exploring What Makes Some Institutions More Adaptable and Resilient to Changes in Their Environment than Others?6. In that publication she outlines several internal and external barriers to institutional change, even as the context in which they operate changes. She describes three design characteristics, diversity, modularity, and redundancy which can contribute to institutional fitness. Elsewhere7, Bednar and Scott Page argue that the collective intelligence of a community depends on network structures linking diverse perspectives, and that those structures may depend on institutional ensembles.
Federal systems are presented by Bednar as being particularly robust. Such distributed structures offer systems level fitness advantages not found at the institution level, through phenomenon such as institutional complementarity, subsidiarity and “spillover”. This presents a compelling opportunity (and perhaps obligation) for embracing a CAS approach within our Land Grant system, something eXtension and federated bodies such as APLU, ECOP, AgNIC and USAIN are well positioned to champion and facilitate in coordination with federal agencies like the USDA.
Donella Meadows, co-author of the groundbreaking 1972 book The Limits to Growth, pioneered the application of complex systems analysis toward sustainability challenges. In the paper Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System8 she outlined a series of specific system properties which could be targeted to proactively change a system (or even transform it entirely).
Meadows arranged these “leverage points” along a continuum from those most easily altered but with relatively weak impacts (left end of lever above) to those more challenging to alter but extremely influential (right end above). These represented what she called “places within a complex system where a small shift in one thing can produce big changes in everything”, a nonlinear trait of complex systems. Interestingly and still relevant today, Meadows first iteration of these levers came to her while attending a high-level meeting about globalization. Though well-intentioned she grew increasingly concerned about its focus on enhancing corporate growth without adequate attention to control mechanisms. Here and elsewhere Meadows reminded us that in many cases it is not technical solutions but our own mindsets which are holding us back from real (and often counterintuitive) solutions to wicked problems like hunger, with actions taken potentially worsening the very issues we seek to resolve…
People are not hungry in this rich country because there is too little food or money or organization. They are hungry because food, money, and organizations are not used for the purpose of once-and-for-all ending hunger. What is lacking is public commitment, or as some call it, political will.
In terms of my own work within the Cornell University library system, with Cooperative Extension, and beyond, I’m particularly interested in how increasingly sophisticated information tools and systems can better effect positive social change through lever number 7, The structure of information flows (who does and does not have access to information), and the affect that might have on the other levers.
Socio-Technical Systems Supporting Collective Intelligence
To support community and political decision-making, and the social “argumentative process” viewed as critical for better understanding wicked problems [and I would contend self-organized, emergent solutions], Horst Rittel and colleague Werner Kunz introduced the concept of Issue-Based Information Systems (IBIS) in their paper Issues as Elements of Information Systems9. It states:
IBIS guides the identification, structuring, and settling of issues raised by problem-solving groups, and provides information pertinent to the discourse. It is linked to conventional documentation systems but also activates other sources. Elements of the system are topics, issues, questions of fact, positions, arguments, and model problems.
Though IBIS was introduced before the arrival of modern computing systems, use of these was definitely anticipated. A variety of computer assisted or web based tools supporting this kind of sense-making through argumentation process have indeed been developed by others since then (see this blog post for a great overview: From information to knowledge: the what and whence of issue based information systems). I’ll be exploring potential Cooperative Extension applications with other colleagues at the upcoming eXtension Diversity & Inclusion Issue Corps designathon next month in Cincinnati, looking at how structured approaches like this, “designed for conversation”, might support civil discourse around health, wealth and shared prosperity, leading to collaborative solutions to issues like hunger.
This approach of bringing people, technology and information together in support emergent solutions is closely related to the concept of sociotechnical systems. The term was publicly introduced by Eric Trist and Ken Bamforth based on action research work with workers in English coal mines10. A key focus is on “joint optimization”, where both social and technical subsystems are optimized to promote organizational performance AND worker well-being.
Similar to what has happened with IBIS, since that time the concept of sociotechnical systems and their applications has continued to evolve and dovetail with other fields like complexity science. In their paper Solving Wicked Social Problems with Socio-computational Systems11, Joshua Introne and his colleagues describe one such effort, Climate CoLab,
representative of a general approach to melding human intelligence and social technology to solve wicked social problems. It is a sociotechnical system writ large, that leverages not only the intelligence of thousands of community members, but also the knowledge and capabilities of many pre-existing human systems. The platform itself is merely a nexus in which we hope our vast potential collective intelligence may be applied to solve the problem of climate change.
Work like this on “collective intelligence” platforms and systems draws from many of the same insights and biological models informing complexity science more broadly. For example a key mechanism supporting self-organization and the spontaneous emergence of complex, intelligent structures or behaviors without the need for central planning, control or even direct communication between agents is called stimergy. “Trace” left in the environment informs subsequent actions by the same and other agents which reinforce and build on each other. One example is the pheromone-marked trace ants leave, supporting networked discovery of and access to vital resources.
Some are recognizing distinct similarities between this type of highly efficient sense-making in the natural world, and the role modern databases, wikis, and social media sites can play in supporting improved knowledge creation and sharing at a societal level12. One of the things my fellowship1 is focused on is understanding how we might enhance the ability of Land Grant personnel to more effectively contribute and gather “digital trace” through sociotechnical capabilities like metaliteracy, simultaneously and efficiently supporting both our individual work and collective mission.
Land Grant System as Emergent Platform
In his book Where Good Ideas Come From: A Natural History of Innovation13, Steven Johnson explores why certain environments seem to be disproportionately better at generating and sharing good ideas. Drawing from science and history he outlines seven distinct patterns which appear again and again, animated in the video below. What he found was that contrary to the common myth of the isolated genius working alone in his lab until that fateful eureka moment occurs, great discoveries often evolve as slow hunches, maturing and connecting to other ideas over time before they’re fully developed. That “chance favors the connected mind”.
One of the key components of innovative environments are what he calls “emergent platforms”. Within the biological world Johnson uses the example of coral reefs, but similar patterns can be found in a variety of other environments, including online ones. By providing accessible and safe environments of confluence, and the necessary scaffolding for increasingly sophisticated collaborations, insights and adaptations, these platforms support innovation in a variety of forms, transforming relative deserts into rich and abundant ecosystems through mechanisms such as resource partitioning and reuse, symbiosis, and tight nutrient cycling.
“Liquid Networks” also play an important role in the development of innovative ideas and adaptations. These spaces or networks (physical or virtual) allow a diversity of ideas and elements to come together and combine in creative, and sometimes serendipitous or fortuitous ways. One way this happens in dense networks/populations is through what is called “information spillover” (similar to Bednar’s reference to institutional spillover above), where ideas and information are allowed to easily pass across and between domains or areas of interest, uninhibited by disciplinary silos.
Another important concept Johnson refers to is “stacking”, combining or re-appropriating previous innovations to create new ones, often in unusual and unexpected ways through what evolutionary biologists call exaptation. He uses the example of Tim Berners-Lee developing and combining several technologies (HTML, URI and HTTP) to create the World Wide Web (laying the groundwork for the modern Semantic Web stack I mentioned in an earlier post)
In my next post, I’ll be sharing my fellowship1 final report with several specific recommendations related to how we can work together on implementing the above ideas within the agrifood systems domain, transforming our Land Grant system into a “socio-technical platform supporting continuous learning and innovation”. On January 19th from 12-1pm Eastern Time I’ll also be sharing those results via an eXtension Zoom webinar. UPDATE -a recording of that presentation and the slides are now available here.
References
This Solving for Pattern series represents one effort to learn and work out loud as I pursue an eXtension supported “Land Grant Informatics” fellowship, exploring ways we might more effectively link people, technology and information in support of healthy people, food systems, communities, and our Land Grant mission.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730. Modified version of paper originally presented to the Panel on Policy Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Boston, December 1969.
Bednar, J., & Page, S. E. (2016). Complex Adaptive Systems and Comparative Politics: Modeling the Interaction between Institutions and Culture. Chinese Political Science Review, 1(3), 448–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-016-0039-6
Trist, E., & Bamforth, W. (1951) Some Social and Psychological Consequences of the Long Wall Method of Coal-Getting, Human Relations, Vol. 4, 3-38 https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675100400101
Introne, J., Laubacher, R., Olson, G., & Malone, T. (2013). Solving Wicked Social Problems with Socio-computational Systems. KI – Künstliche Intelligenz, 27(1), 45–52. https://joshintrone.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/ai.pdf
Musil, J., Musil, A., Weyns, D., & Biffl, S. (2015). An architecture framework for collective intelligence systems. In Software Architecture (WICSA), 2015 12th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on (pp. 21–30). IEEE. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7158500
eXtension is excited to announce the first Community Issue Corpsopportunity specifically targeting Communities of Practice and Learning Networks. This Community Corps will identify and engage eXtension Communities in a Design Event supporting projects targeting local, area, state, or national audiences to make a visible and measurable impact at the local level. During the Design Event, eXtension will assist project teams in the refinement of their plans and provide access to resources and people (Key Informants) that will help shape the project’s design and potential impact. We are prepared to accept up to 10 projects/programs from existing or new eXtension Communities to become the first Community Issue Corps.
WHAT DOES A COMMUNITY CORPS PROJECT LOOK LIKE?
An eXtension Issue Corps project can be made up of a small or large team of individuals who have a common interest in solving a local problem or addressing a local issue. This is an opportunity for a Community to tackle a NEW topic or goal with NEW strategies for execution and evaluation that can then be applied to future projects and programs. A Corps project is a way to narrow a Community’s focus on key competencies/deliverables and design the educational outreach as an experiment/research project in order to determine local impact and effectiveness while establishing communication and marketing strategies to broadcast success stories. The Design Event can take a GOOD IDEA and make it a GREAT IDEA that results in a pitch for seeking support, funding, and resources needed to carry out the activity. Corps projects can be thought of as pilots and those findings could be used to expand to larger scales once a tested methodology is established for the specific purpose. Scan projects from our first Issue Corps at i-Three Issue Corps Project Map of 2016.
Starter Ideas for Community Corps Projects:
Develop a locally-targeted social media campaign around a desired public behavior change
Provide a civic engagement toolkit that can be used to spearhead a local change initiative
Modify a successful program to better reach a culturally diverse population and test locally
Use multimedia storytelling to raise awareness of a local emerging issue or successful strategy
Host an innovation contest to generate new solutions to an identified local issue
Demonstrate a new way to visualize local data generated within your content area
Create a Citizen Science project that engages the public in helping to solve a local problem
Test a new online education delivery method with a local-level target audience
DO YOU HAVE WHAT IT TAKES?
Readiness criteria important for successful leadership of Issue Corps projects.
Takes initiative
Perceived as influential
Curious teachable spirit
Good storyteller and communicator
Open to new ideas
Creative
Flexible and adaptive to change
Ability to get things done
Enjoys collaborating
Uses mobile technology such as a smartphone or tablet for their work
Perseverance to overcome obstacles and modify strategies
FINANCIAL SUPPORT:
eXtension Foundation will cover the following onsight expenses:
Hotel room nights
Event scheduled meals and breaks
Meeting space
Event design and facilitation
Key informants, coaches, and support throughout your Corps experience
i-Three Issue Corps Project Members should be prepared to cover transportation expenses:
Travel by plane or car to Detroit, Michigan
Travel from the airport to the hotel if applicable
Meals on your own
Any incidentals
PROPOSAL GUIDELINES: Projects should result in the ability to impact the target audience at a local level even if the activity is designed and delivered for a state, a region or nationally. Execution of projects must be accomplished in a short timeframe concluding in late spring or early summer.
Innovative approaches to addressing local issues are desirable and preferred. Projects as presented will serve as a concept that is ready for further refinement during the design event.
The Primary Project Contact leader from the Community must be from a member institution. Review the list of Member institutions to verify membership status.
WHAT WILL THE COMMUNITY ISSUE CORPS DO?
Submit a proposal by October 7, 2016: This call for proposals is meant to be simple and straightforward asking for basic Community information and 200 word responses to several questions. (see below)
Upon acceptance, receive one-on-one online coaching to review your proposal and prepare for the Design Event.
Take advantage of an online orientation webinar that will cover key topics in preparation for the Design Event and for shaping your proposal.
Attend the Design Event – December 7 – 9, 2016. Corps members must arrive on December 7th (possible evening reception and activity on Dec. 7) to be able to meet starting at 8 am on December 8 and will finish December 9th no earlier than noon. This event will provide each team (up to 3 members per team) with access to new strategies and resources that will shape each proposal individually and result in a clearer plan of action.
Design Thinking
Concept Mapping
Key Informants
Creating a Project Pitch
Receive additional Coaching and Professional Development from eXtension as new questions or needs emerge after the Design Event.
Share outcomes and impact of your project:
Share proposal and results with eXtension in a webinar spotlight
Share work in social media networks & with your institution’s communication team
Provide blog posts for eXtension about the progress of your project
Showcase (abstract, paper, poster, presentation) your project works and outcome at an appropriate national or state meeting
Primary Project Contact, Institution, & Contact Information
Name of Collaborators, Institutions, & Contact Information (Feel free to list all team members associated with the project then successful applications will identify the 3 representatives to the Design Event)
Summary of Proposed Project to include answers to each question in 200 words or less:
Proposal Topic or Title (keywords)
What is the LOCAL Problem or Issue the proposal will address?
Describe your proposed solution to the problem?
In the design of the proposal, what is the local level change expected to achieved?
Thanks to the eXtension Communities who have already expressed interest in the first Issue Corps experience specifically for Communities of Practice and Learning Networks. Based on that response, the eXtension Foundation will launch a call for the 2016-17 Community Issue Corps in the coming days.
Like the 2016 i-Three Issue Corps, the Community Issue Corps will be issue-focused but the topics will be based on solving problems identified by the applicants. Proposals will be due the first week of October and the application process will be simple and straightforward.
The Corps experience will consist of a “designathon” event in December along with professional development activities and coaching to support the projects. Contact Ashley Griffin by email or phone (859-608-2726) with any questions.
It’s always a pleasure reconnecting with and learning from colleagues at eXtension conferences. Last March’s in San Antonio was no different, which included convivial meals along the River Walk and several stimulating workshops.
Slide from UMN Extension program leader Nate Meyer’s presentation using a “Stacey Matrix” to illustrate zone of complexity.
One workshop led by my Network Literacy CoP cohorts included this video by UMN Extension program leader Nate Meyer. In it he encourages Extension to embrace its role cultivating social learning within networked innovation spaces known as “zones of complexity”. Identifiable in a variety of fields and circumstances (including health care), this can in turn create shared pools of collective knowledge which can be drawn on in response to wicked problems and grand challenges which no individual, program or institution can address on its own. [Net Lit CoP co-lead Bob Bertsch writes more about this in his highly recommended blog post Extension 2050: Working Within Networks]
There were also several inspiring keynote speakers at the conference, including John Stepper, author of Working Out Loud. A key strategy of WOL is cultivating relationship networks to enhance self-efficacy and work/life satisfaction by “leading with generosity”, providing insight and assistance to others without expectation of immediate return. Another keynote, Paul Pangaro, spoke about the importance of Extension “designing for conversation”, so the learning spaces we create might better support collaborative, innovative problem solving.
The Grand Challenge: Coordinating Knowledge Infrastructure to Unlock the Potential and Passions of Society
Both are aligned with similar ideas in the library world promoted by individuals such as R. David Lankes, who believes our primary role is the creation of knowledge in and with communities, through conversation. Because we are “in the conversation business”, and technology and particularly the internet is changing the role, form and location of conversations, we must now consider how to provide conversational, participatory network infrastructure. More recently, Lankes has been so bold as to say that THE grand challenge (defined as a societal-level problem that is solvable and has high potential rewards) for librarianship is “coordinating the knowledge infrastructure to unlock the potential and passions of society”. [See my previous blog post for other ideas related to networked knowledge creation, and eXtension’s investment in that capacity]
These approaches are all relevant to the work I and others do at Land Grant libraries like Cornell University’s Mann Library, in support of our diverse communities of inquiry and practice. They’re also related to a “Land Grant Informatics” research fellowship I’m currently pursuing with support from Cornell University Library and eXtension, exploring ways we might more seamlessly and effectively link people, technology and information in support of our Land Grant mission, the communities we serve, and timely, adaptive responses to complex problems. For my fellowship I’ll be focusing on healthy food systems, and issues such as climate change and food security.
This investigation is being informed by my colleagues, mentors and networks, as well as decades of front line experience in farming and food systems work before entering academia 20 years ago. Along the way I’ve been influenced by a number of practitioners and thinkers, including National Humanities Medal recipient Wendell Berry, who through his writings has helped me better appreciate the value of culture in agriculture. He’s also highlighted the importance of a systems perspective in preventing and solving wicked problems. In Solving for Pattern (Chapter 9 of The Gift of Good Land: Further Essays Cultural & Agricultural, North Point Press, 1981) Berry writes:
To the problems of farming, then, as to other problems of our time, there appear to be three kinds of solutions, [those which]…
1. Cause a ramifying series of new problems… that… arise beyond the purview of the expertise that produced the solution…
2. Immediately worsen the problem it is intended to solve, causing a hellish symbiosis in which problem and solution reciprocally enlarge one another…
The Community Club, from the 1918 publication “Farm knowledge… the farmer’s own cyclopedia”, available at http://chla.library.cornell.edu/c/chla/browse/title/3074995.html
3. It is not until health is set down as the aim that we come in sight of the third kind of solution: that which causes a ramifying series of solutions… [with] a concern for pattern, for quality… [based on and reinforcing] relationships of mutual dependence.
As part of my own efforts to work out loud, over the next several months I’ll be sharing insights and reflections from my fellowship, as I explore how we might better “solve for pattern” within, across and beyond the Land Grant system. I’ll end this post with the image to the right, from a 1918 publication, The farmer’s own cyclopedia (available from one of Mann Library’s digital collections). In many ways I see Extension and eXtension at its best as modern versions of the “Community Club” illustrated here. My hope is this series itself will encourage and provoke ideas, information and inspiration from others, including those working outside of Extension and the Land Grant system. Please feel free to add your own thoughts and experiences operating in the zone of complexity below!
Being selected to be part of the i-Three Issues Corps brought some trepidation. How would we be innovative? How would our project show impact? Fortunately, thanks to the i-Three Corps leadership, we learned new tools and strategies to tackle the challenges we face as extensionists. One example that really moved our project team forward was the concept map expertly proposed by Dr. Paul Pangaro in San Antonio at the Design-a-thon.
CFW team working on the concept map at the design-a-thon in San Antonio. Photo by Robert Bardon.
Paul is a master of design thinking – an innovative process combining methods from engineering and design with business thinking, the social sciences and arts.
After a few attempts at defining our problem systematically on paper, with markers and stickies, we cut through the fog to arrive at the key points of attack that would lead to success.
What a productive exercise! The process allowed us to collaborate as a team, to brainstorm, think innovatively, understand our project in greater depth and most importantly, identify the gaps in our model – places we need to focus effort to make our project a success and see impact.
Draft of the concept map for the Climate, Forests and Woodlands project. Photo by Susan E. Moore.
We didn’t do it alone — reviewers from another i-Three Corps team enhanced what we thought was a finished product. Our trip to the eXtension i-Three Corps Issues Teams Design-a-Thon at NeXC 2016 was a highpoint in our nearly two-year process of innovation and impact with the Climate, Forests and Woodlands (CFW) Community of Practice. We had the issue of climate change clearly in our sights, now we can strategically address the key areas where we can actually make a difference in the lives of our clients. Our team sends a shout-out to Paul, to the eXtension staff, to the other i-Three Corps Issues Teams – thanks for everything, we could not have done it without you!
There are many examples of public-private partnerships involving Extension. After all, Extension’s mission is to impact peoples’ lives positively, both in personal and professional contexts.
When you find an example where this partnership raises the bar for an emerging industry, it really makes a person take notice.
Such is the Professional Nutrient Applicators Association of Wisconsin or PNAAW, which was founded in 2001. PNAAW includes more than 50% of the custom manure applicators throughout the state of Wisconsin, a few from Iowa and Minnesota, and works closely on professional development with several UW-extension agents and conservation agencies, including the Department of Agriculture, Department of Natural Resources, Conservation Districts, and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Why go to all this trouble for a job as simple as spreading manure?
Because it is not so simple.
Applying manure is a demanding profession. Some of the issues for custom applicators are the need for expensive and specialized equipment as well as the ability to interpret complex nutrient management plans. Applicators need to be familiar with biosecurity protocols, setbacks, and other requirements that vary county by county and even from one farm to the next. Add in the fact that the general public sometimes sees manure as a nasty waste instead of a valuable fertilizer, and you quickly recognize the high degree of professionalism and precision required.
“The new ideas that came from this industry in the last fifteen years are incredible” notes University of Wisconsin Extension Specialist Kevin Erb. “Innovations such as manure agitation boats, automatic shutdowns when a leak occurs, and remote monitoring of application by drone or smartphone app have greatly decreased spills and increased efficiency—and they’ve all started at the farm level.”
To further elaborate on impacts of this partnership, Extension develops and delivers basic and advanced training to the applicators and their employees. This has resulted in an expectation by farmers that their nutrient management plans will be followed, and that the risk of a problem is much less if they hire a trained applicator. That risk reduction is recognized by the insurance industry, whose underwriters routinely approve 10%-38% discounts in liability and pollution risk insurance for trained and certified applicators; a savings of hundreds or thousands of dollars.
Similar organizations have or are developing in several states, including Ohio, Iowa, North Dakota, and others. To learn more about this project, visit the PNAAW website.
Recently, I’ve come across a website called Stack Exchange a number of times—whether in a Google search, or in conversation with colleagues who use it regularly. As I explored Stack Exchange I realized there is one thing Extension does more effectively and for free—that is answering people’s questions.
What is Stack Exchange?
Stack Exchange is a website where people ask questions and other people answer them. The site is organized into 149 communities and there are 109 million unique visitors each month. Anyone can ask and answer questions. There is a robust system of badges and so called “reputation points” that reward those who provide highly rated answers.
Questions are also moderated so that they focus on problems. Stack Exchange recommends asking about, “Specific issues within each site’s area of expertise.” and “Real problems or questions that you’ve encountered.” “Chit-chat” is discouraged as is general discussion. The site focuses on getting answers to questions without having to filter through irrelevant information. The fact that questions are actually moderated also adds to the usefulness of the site. Not that discussion is a bad thing, but in my experience I’ve found that there can be a lot of fluff to sift through which is not useful when you’re actually looking for an answer to a problem or a question.
Uniquely, people also vote for answers they deem to be better and in this way, each answer is “peer reviewed” so to speak. Again, it’s true that the peers may or may not have advanced degrees. But maybe they do, and at least they may have some experience in the subject area.
Users also have a profile that describes their expertise. True, it could be fabricated, but if people use their real names, that’s probably not the case.
What is Ask an Expert?
Ask an Expert is eXtension’s tool that allows a clientele to use a form to “ask an expert” any question. Often that question is answered by someone in the same state or county. In 2014, about 3000 Experts answered more than 50,000 questions. Either the expert or the answer seeker can choose to privatize their question.
How does Ask an Expert stack up with Stack Exchange?
Stack Exchange
“[Stack Exchange’s] goal is to have the best answers to every question, so if you see questions or answers that can be improved, you can edit them.”
Anyone can answer questions–so called expert or not
109 million unique visitors each month, 149 topical communities
Questions and answers are all public
Questions and answers are reviewed, improved, and voted for by users (peer reviewed)
A system of badges is used to reward engagement with the site whether it’s voting for better answers, answering questions, or asking questions
Ask an Expert
Goal is to have a local expert answer every question with research based information.
Anyone can ask a question, but only Extension experts can answer them
In 2014, about 3000 Experts answered more than 50,000 questions
Users and experts can choose to keep their question private
No public input on validity or relevance of questions or answers. No opportunity to rank or vote for answers.
Reward system is not directly tied to each action. Reward system is based more on overall job performance and is in terms of tenure
Questions for discussion or to ponder:
Is it better to join existing networks such as Stack Exchange or to create ones that solely belong to Extension?
If Extension maintains separate platforms or sites, what can we learn from highly successful websites such as Stack Exchange to be more efficient, widely used, and effective?
Is there inherent value in answering a question one-on-one either by email, phone, or face-to-face?
Is crowdsourced expertise and advice a threat to the previously held monopoly Extension has held on doling out advice—especially in certain areas such as agriculture and food preservation?
Would a badge or other non-monetary reward system inspire Extension professionals to spend more time on national efforts such as eXtension?
Bret Simmons talks about value in terms of “. . .what you can do uniquely well to help others address opportunities and solve problems that matter to them.” What if someone out there is doing something better than us, even if we’ve been doing it for a hundred years?
It’s not just about improving efficiency, but it is about that. One of Stack Exchange’s most valuable features is the mechanism to collaboratively improve and build on someone’s original answer. That improves the quality of the information. It boils down to increasing impact–making high quality information available to the world or at least to anyone in the world with that particular question.
In this article, I zoomed in on Ask an Expert because it’s Nationwide and Extension’s counterpart to Stack Exchange. But these question could be asked in any Extension context that is involved in answering questions–probably just about everyone in Extension.
I hope you’ll share your thoughts and comments on this topic, below.
One solution offered by Digital Green is the community video approach, using peer learning and human-mediated discussion to help disseminate farming or other skills. In this approach, a community member is trained in video production and facilitation skills. Once trained, videos are produced staring local farmers, on topics needed in the community.
