Progressive rural industries seek sustainable production. Community interest in sustainability issues also encourages horticulturists to work towards sustainable development which encompasses environmental, economic and social elements. Industry initiative and community interest generate three important educational needs. Firstly, those entering the industry and in it need to understand sustainable management principles. Secondly, those in the industry need to be aware of what society expects-sustainable development is more than assured future production. Thirdly, community needs opportunities to understand horticultural production issues in ways that allow their participation in finding sustainable solutions. Strategies that can help meet these educational needs are proposed.
Once there was talk about three kinds of untruths: lies, damned lies and statistics. Today some would happily add the new catch-phrase 'sustainable development' to the trio. It is complex, it is hard to define, it is elusive-perhaps non-achievable-but nevertheless most agree it is something we must strive for. Recent history has convinced politicians, catchment managers, primary producers and the whole community of consumers that we need increased effort towards sustainability in use and management of our resources.
The rapid growth of the landcare movement is evidence that primary producers accept this need. Brian Scarsbrick, Chairman of Landcare Australia Limited, claims that some 35 per cent of rural producers are now involved Australia-wide. One of the goals of landcare, as described in Queensland's Decade of Landcare Plan (1991, p. vii) is to 'Maintain the economic viability of agricultural production within an ecologically sustainable framework'. Landcare bodies and catchment committees are working with industry organisations and government agencies to develop farming systems and Codes of Best Practice to achieve this objective.
Sustainability is surely a big issue in the minds of tree and nut crop growers who need to plan well ahead, and face delayed returns as well as limited flexibility once the trees are in the ground. Issues of most concern are probably the ability of land and water resources to maintain productive growth, the financial impact of doing whatever needs to be done to maintain these resources in good condition, and perhaps the possibility of depressed market returns should many others decide to grow the selected crop. Along with most producers, tree and nut crop growers would probably emphasize that if development is not economically sustainable then it is not sustainable.
However, growers need also to recognise that community as a whole looks at sustainability from a broader perspective: they are not only interested in the continued availability of a valued product, but are also concerned about the environmental, economic and social impacts of horticultural production beyond the farm gate.
Three major educational needs emerge from producers' increased recognition of the importance of sustainability, and the differing perspectives of producers and rest of society in considering sustainability issues.
These are:
This paper identifies the broader expectations of sustainable development, suggests some educational principles for sustainability in horticulture, and provides examples of initiatives that might be useful models for education programs.
From the producers' viewpoint, specific issues threatening the sustainability of tree and nut cropping vary from place to place. Some geographically specific examples are salinity in the orchard crops of the Murray River basin, and soil erosion in sloping plantations of Queensland and northern New South Wales. Widespread issues include nutrient and pesticide contamination of waterways adjacent to orchards and limited supplies of water. There are undoubtedly other important issues (both environmental and economic) which can best be identified by those in the industry. Less obvious and perhaps as yet unknown issues may arise through major environmental changes such as global warming.
The issues of developing sustainable farming systems and having quality assurance protocols adopted by growers affect horticulture as well as other rural industries. To identify these issues from society's perspective, it is appropriate to look at the broad dimensions of the concept of ecologically sustainable development (ESD). While there is a lack of general agreement on its precise definition-there are, in fact, more than 160 documented definitions (McLeod 1993)-a set of principles has emerged from deliberations in 1987 by the World Commission on Environment and Development, and subsequent debate, including documentation of the Australian Government's interpretation of ESD.
The following principles (underlined) are adaptations (Department of Education, Queensland 1992, p. 9) of principles identified in the discussion paper Ecologically Sustainable Development (1990). Alongside each principle, we offer an interpretation for horticulturists.
Principles for the physical environment
Economic principles
Social principles
It might be asking a lot to expect horticulturists to bear all of these principles in mind when planning a new venture. Nevertheless, an educational program for sustainable horticulture needs to help producers understand how society views sustainable development and assist them to make wise decisions in the light of that understanding. At the same time it needs to lead community to an appreciation of horticultural issues and a reasonableness in what it expects of sustainable horticulture.
An educational program dealing with sustainability issues aims for awareness, understanding of issues, attitudes that lead to commitment, and ultimately action for sustainability (Fien 1993).
Education for sustainability needs to be based in practical experiences and have an intention to do something; it is not an academic exercise. This message is highlighted by environmental educators who plan around the concept that environmental education is ABOUT (understanding how the system works and identifying the potential impact of activities); IN (providing practical experience; gathering data and making field assessment) and FOR the environment (developing skills to improve, and willingness to act).
The emphasis may differ for producers and community members. For instance, the focus for producers may be to enable them to feel confident in making personal decisions that are both sustainable and profitable. For some community members, awareness of the issues facing horticulture and efforts to move towards sustainability might be sufficient. Others, however, will want to be involved in a process that enables them to assess the issues and collaborate in decision-making.
Having identified the appropriate aims it is important to use delivery methods that suit the various interest groups. For producers, short informal workshops may be more practical and acceptable than courses, even though the learning may be more disjointed. For potential producers the principles can be established in formal training by building appropriate sustainable management education into degree and TAFE courses in horticulture. This should follow a general appreciation of sustainability issues developed through the school curricula. For other community members, delivery is needed at two levels-awareness-raising activities and publicity will suit some, while others need to be offered hands-on participation in assessing issues and finding solutions.
There seems to be an in-built resistance by many experienced farmers to any suggestion of 'education' or training. Industry leaders and the rural press have commented frequently on this. The following editorial comment for the Australian Rural Times, 15-21 February 1990, provides just one example:
National Farmers Federation president John Allright put it squarely when he said that unless farmers gave education a higher priority they would condemn themselves and their industries to inevitable decline and non-viability.
Those running rural courses have identified several reasons for non-participation:
For their part, producers might reply that what is offered doesn't contain what they want, and they would respond to courses tailored to their needs.
However, there are indications that this reluctance to take advantage of training/education opportunities is waning. Responsibilities being thrust upon or taken up by producers to be self-reliant information seekers (partly through changes in government extension services), and more appealing alternative methods now emerging suggest that farmers will soon make better use of education opportunities.
Educational approaches for sustainable management that are currently working or being put in place include:
The group can also be a powerful forum for drawing together information of common interest from outside, and undertaking monitoring of various parameters that affect sustainable management, such as organic matter levels, soil compaction, pH or insect build-up.
GRASS Check (Forge 1994) is an example of a package developed to support this type of activity that is now being well used. Landholders who are interested in monitoring the condition of their native pastures, attend a group training day, receive a manual and then establish several monitoring sites on their property. They then periodically record data on the tests of interest to themselves or the group. The group can then meet at a later stage to discuss findings. This principle could be used for tree and nut crop related issues to generate data for shared learning. GRASS Check has a companion, Soil Check, which is designed for soil monitoring under any land use.
Action research methods such as Waterwatch and Saltwatch described in the section on community education are also useful tools to increase understanding by landusers.
Education about, in and for sustainable development is best achieved by participative learning processes: participative in the sense that people are actively taking part in collecting information and also in the sense that people interact to share information and reach collective conclusions. There is much more to participative research than merely collecting and sharing information. There is a complex mix of 'synthesizing and recording, analysing and planning, belonging and experiencing, committing and acting, evaluating and communicating' (Kelly 1995, p. 102).
Saltwatch, focusing on salinity, and Waterwatch, a water quality monitoring program are two such participative educational programs relevant to sustainable horticulture issues. Other 'watch' programs focusing on beetles, worms, pasture, etc. follow comparable action research processes and could serve as models for exploring various facets of sustainable horticulture.
Salinity issues in Victoria, which have an impact on tree horticulture, sparked some innovative information collection and educational programs which have been further developed in other States. Saltwatch was the prototype. Students collect water samples from known sources, test salinity, transmit the salinity values and grid references to research centres by computer disk, and in return receive a district map setting out the readings. This can be used as a discussion point with the local landcare group.
A related issue, depth of watertable, gave rise to 'Watertable Watch' in some fruit growing areas of Victoria. A simple method for students and community members to trace changes in the watertable was devised and used to manage water usage.
Waterwatch (along with companion concepts Streamwatch, and Ribbons of Blue), is a more complex program. It covers a range of physical, chemical and biological tests for water quality and streambank condition. Waterwatch generates an understanding of catchment issues by linking data from schools, community groups, individual landusers and perhaps local government authorities throughout a catchment. It is important to note that it is a valuable meeting point for producers with the rest of community, and interactions provide opportunities to share perceptions and values as well as data, and to collaborate in developing workable solutions to catchment issues. The Waterwatch approach was based on work done several years ago by the University of Michigan with a local river catchment community (Mitchell & Stapp 1995).
While these programs provide a sound basis for learning about catchment issues and developing rapport between producers and other community members, industry could supplement these with programs more specifically focused on horticulture.
Another aspect of an effective educational program is to match resources to school curricula, so that teachers are given the opportunity to use them to meet their own teaching objectives. This involves the important step of alerting teachers to these opportunities and, if needed, providing training (this is done with Saltwatch and Waterwatch programs). In developing educational resources for schools, it is important to liaise with curriculum developers at an early stage.
Community interest in sustainable management and producers' realisation of its importance for long-term viability give incentives for industry organisations and government agencies to provide educational programs related to sustainable management in horticulture. Most of the examples in this paper focus on issues related to the physical environment, although the economic and social impacts can and should be built into them.
This paper has outlined ways for producers to learn about land and water resource management for sustainable production, ways for community members to appreciate issues facing horticultural production, and ways in which producers and other community members can share perceptions and values on sustainable horticulture issues.
Tree and nut croppers probably enter the industry with differing internal motivations-for some a profit motive, for others lifestyle, for others a passion for new technology or the quest to grow something successfully where it hasn't been done before. Whatever the driving force, there is a need to understand the implications of development decisions for environment and people, and be willing to moderate the passion in the interests of sustainability.
Carr, A. (1986). Buying the farm for horticulture-site it right, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland.
Commonwealth Government (1990). Ecologically Sustainable Development: A Discussion Paper, AGPS, Canberra.
Department of Education (1992). Teaching for Ecologically Sustainable Development, Department of Education, Queensland.
Department of Primary Industries (1994). AGRI-LINK-Looking after your Horticultural Land, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland.
Fien, J. (1993). 'Introduction to Environmental Education', in Teaching for a Sustainable World-Environmental and Development Education Project for Teacher Education, ed. J. Fien, Australian International Development Assistance Bureau, Australian Association for Environmental Education, Griffith University.
Forge, K. (comp.) (1994). GRASS Check: Grazier Rangeland Assessment for Self Sustainability, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland.
Jordan, A.T. (1993). Self-Help Landcare for New Farmers, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland.
Keith, K.J. & Bryant, P.M. (1992). 'Overcoming Rural Educational Barriers to Sustainable Land Management', in Proceeding, Seventh International Soil Conservation Conference, Sydney, pp. 413-19.
Kelly, A. (1995). 'A mud map for Landcarers: The Technique of Participatory Research', in Participative Approaches for Landcare: Perspectives, Policies and Programs, eds S. Chamala & K. Keith, Australian Academic Press, Brisbane.
McLeod, H. (1993). 'Teaching for Ecologically Sustainable Development', in Teaching for a Sustainable World- Environmental and Development Education Project for Teacher Education, ed. J. Fien, Australian International Development Assistance Bureau, Australian Association for Environmental Education, Griffith University.
Mitchell, M. & Stapp, W. (1995). 'Watershed Monitoring by students: Education that improves Water Quality and the Lives of People', in Participative Approaches for Landcare: Perspectives, Policies and Programs, eds S. Chamala & K. Keith, Australian Academic Press, Brisbane.
Queensland Government (1991). Decade of Landcare Plan, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland.