Earlier I introduced my thesis research regarding the ‘Sense of place in Galicica national park‘. My research is coming to an end, but I am still cautious to speak of results prematurely. So I will share how my research days look like. Embarked on the mission to do a field research in the National Park “Galicica” in Macedonia, I begun packing my backpack: 

• Field audio recorder. I will do open interviews with people, and writing notes whilst doing interviews is out of the question. First, if I write, I will have to pause the conversation and that will take a lot of time, and the person might forget what he or she was talking about, but most important, I am too lazy to write.
• Photo camera. I am researching sense of place, and having visual records of the places is a must. At least this is how I see it.
• Video camera. Photography is beautiful and my favourite art, but sometimes it does not say enough. Image and sound is compelling to more senses than just image.
• Handheld GPS. I should not get lost, but it will also come handy in marking those places that people see important, and making a map of what I’ve researched, as places reside in locations.
• Replacement batteries. I do not think that I will bump into a MediaMarkt shop behind that mountain peak.
• Walking stick. It is a mountain, dogs wondering around, thorny bushes, and my left knee is not really in a good shape. Besides, this one has a ¼” screw on the top, so I can use it as a monopod for the camera.
• Some snacks. I will spend a full day out.
• Sun tan cream. I hope that there will be some sun today.
• Toilet paper. No need to stress this importance.

Well, if people are not scared from my looks, I figure that means that they are open for a conversation on their sense of place. So I’m off on the first bus to the next village on my list. I arrive there around mid day. At this time only retired people are in the village. I walk around and I meet an old granny. But she refuses to speak with the recorder on. She says that afterwards someone might come to look for her. I, on the other hand, refuse to talk to her without the recorder. It is not only the issue of not noting all the detail of the conversation, but it is the issue that at a later stage of my research I will see some interesting correlation, something I might use to build a theory on. Now if I have only my written notes, I will not have this new thing noted. But if I have an audio recording of the conversation, I can check if there is really a pattern or something to relate to my new discovery in the interviews I’ve did in the past. Additionally, people that refuse to talk with the recorder on are people that have something to hide. So those people will tell me less or even lies, thus I can consider them as a misleading factor, or simply a waste of time. So I go my way. The granny did give me a boiled egg, as it was Eastern just yesterday, it will come in handy for my lunch later.

I run into another old woman. The village seems quite deserted now, and only women are around. The woman refuses to talk to me at all. She says that I should talk to the men. I’ve noted this hierarchy of talking to outsiders in other villages as well. Men do the talking with me, while the women just go and bring the drinks. However, I did have some interviews with women here and there, so this whole research is not going to be totally men sided.

Finally I run into a man. And he looks like he is eager to talk and has no problems on the recorder. But states that he does not have a good vocabulary and he is not to be emitted on the radio or TV. So we start, about him self, his life path and life choices, the history of the village, the current state of the village people, the sacred sites, etc. I do not have a particular structure, I just know that I need to get these points from this man, but I let him lead me in the conversation. I put tricky questions to make him think or react, and sometimes I explain in detail about my self and my research in order to gain greater confidence. At the end of the conversation, after a whole hour or more, I think about one quarter of the talk is something that I can use for my thesis.

Now, as I’ve gained some knowledge about the village, I go to find and document the places the man just stressed either as important and/or as sacred. This time I did not meet anyone there, but sometimes I run into people there and I ask them more about that place or I do a full interview. On this occasion I documented the main village church, the monument from the second world was; the centre of the village; the village water spring; and a small thing that resembles like a church that was built by a Dutch person that owns a house in this village, and that had a dream in which he dreamt that he should build some church there, so he did (locals say that old people spoke of an old church at that same place).

By the time I finish documenting all these places the working people came back in the village, as they work in the city of Ohrid some 27km away (a very big distance for their understanding). So I go to the village centre, sit in front of the village shop and talk to some of the people that are already there. I do start talking to only one person, but by the time I finish my conversation every person there is talking to me. This situation gives me the opportunity to talk to many people at the same time, and is very good to confirm what I’ve already heard from the individual conversations beforehand. However, as on these places mainly men come together to drink a beer and talk about daily politics, I can not get any personal feelings related to the place(s) as I would in an individual interview. Still, a very valuable experience.

Interested? See http://www.galicica.rantasa.net/  or emial me: bojan@rantasa.net

I participated many seminars and presentations, and I did speak with many professors, researches and teachers. And they all touched my heart, because their heart was always with the oppressed and the poor. I had the opportunity to meet the highest person in charge (Prof. dr. Gwonda, the Vice Chancellor) several times, and every time I spoke with him, I was impressed by his commitment with the message and mission of his institute. To help the poor and the very poor; to empower the weak and the marginalized.

Anyway, to reduce costs for small farmers, and to make them more independent and less vulnerable, the UASB developed many strategies, but all based on the idea of an ‘integrated approach’ of research, extension, training, education, marketing  and empowerment! Technology isn’t seen just as a tool for problem solving and making progress, but also as a way and an instrument to meet people, to start dialogues and more over: to help them to organize their own identities and  interests.

Intermezzo: Their approach and philosophy reminds me to lectures I gave years and years ago to students Irrigation and Land Water Management. In one of those courses, I read  parts of Vargas Lloysa’s book ‘Garabomba de onzichtbare’, in which he describes that a school is build to emancipate the oppressed and illiterates , but every time when the school was almost finished, it burned down. So the whole process of building the school (at dark, illegal, risk full) had to start again and again. Reading the book, you start to hate the oppressors, because without any doubt they’re the ones that burned down the schoolhouse time and again. But going through the book, it turned out to be the other way around. Garabomba himself (he, who tried to organize the local peoples against injustice and inequality) was the one who set the school in fire. Why? Because building the school was for him a tool to organize people. When the school was finished, and people were still not organized and not aware of their situation, he had to find new ‘technologies’ to organize people…by burning the school!

A presentation by professor Shivamurthy (in his office, just for me) made me aware of my ‘horizon of relevance’; I remembered Vargas’ book and the period I worked with the same theoretical concept: technology as an instrument to emancipate people, by giving them means to handle problems, instruments to improve their practice, but also by  bringing them together and create solidarity and power. His project “Participatory research for empowerment of SC and ST rural poor women through production of neem based biopesticide and Trichoderma by utilizing locally available raw materials” was very successful; not only because “the landless and illiterate rural women have produced 1100 kg. of Trichoderma within two years and intern generated about 730 man days of employment with an income of Rs. 88, 000/- by selling at the rate of Rs 80 / kg”, but also because he managed to empower and organize the very poor. One of Shivamurthy’s conclusions was: “Improving Knowledge and skills of farm women beside raising  Income and employment  had resulted in improving their social capital”.  

Extension means ‘capacity building’, and science means  ‘action research’: “The project was implemented as an action research mode by defining roles and responsibilities of all the stakeholders and the project team.”

The DBT Rural Bio Resource Complex, related to the UASB does more or less the same. In creating links  between science and practice, between technology and users, they do organize farmers at the same time. Officially it is stated that: “In order to minimize costs of production, maximization of profit and creation of additional employment opportunities, various associations has been started”. But these ‘associations’ are more the just instruments to ‘reduce costs’; they emancipate the poor and the illiterates.  I mention just a few of those “Commodity Based Associations” :  Fish Farmers, Corn Growers, Jack Fruit Growers, Flower & Vegetables Growing  Associations, Rural Bio Fuel, Organic Farming Farmers Associations etcetera.

It reminded me to the years that in Wageningen ‘action research’ also was part of the academic culture, and it was a nice experience that ‘action research’ still is alive; not at WU, but here in India!

Jan Schakel

If you look at the figures, you hardly can imagine that India is ‘one country’. India is 100 times as big as The Netherlands, and the population over 80 times. So the whole of India has (in average) almost the same population density as Holland; can you imagine…. ? It has 22 States (India is a federation) and there are 17 official languages. Languages, that are completely different, and although Hindu is the official language (and many people do speak more or less some basic English), the coherence of this nation is rather fragile (not to mention the differences in religion: Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist and Christians). So what about ‘farming and rural life‘ (the title of one of our RSO courses at the WUR); is it possible to get any idea about that?

Today Prof. Krishnamurthy (Dept. of Agricultural Extension UASB) took me to the Bio Resource Complex (part of the Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Govt. of India, New Delhi), just some 40 km. out of Bangalore. On our way we made a stop at a well know (actually: quite famous) farm, which is more or less the result of an ‘Integrated Farm Management Project’ of the University of Bangalore. That this project was rather successful, is shown by the many picture within the farmhouse. The farmer was 4 times (and 3 years in a row) awarded as the ‘best farmer’ (also as the ‘best organic famer’), both on State and National level, and even one picture shows the PM of India visiting his farm. Indeed the farm is impressive. It is only 2 acres, but because of a very sophisticated system of crop rotation and an optimal synergy between the different elements, the farm offers the possibility to be very sustainable, both economically  and in an agronomical way. Indeed, the farm is a classic example of an ‘integrated farm’, with an absolute minimum of external inputs and fully organic. In spite of the small scale (just 2 acres), the farm produces all kind of products: milk, eggs, chickens, flowers, fish, vegetables, herbs, medical plants, spices, peppers, tomatoes, coconuts; name it, it’s grown on the farm. Even worms are part of the integrated system. Manure and organic waste is transferred into compost, and biogas is used for cooking. The engine of an old scooter is used for empowering the pump for sprinkler and drip irrigation. And so on. The farm is not just a pilot and therefore just an isolated island within rural Karnataka. When this prototype of farm was developed, also the economic and institutional context has been analyzed and taken into account. Market relations, food chains, certification of products, quality measurements, labor supply, contract farming; everything was developed in a truly ‘integrated way’. In combination with the very fertile soil and optimal weather conditions (the farm produces the year round, and some crops are grown and harvested three or even four times in a row within one year), this small (2 acre) family farm indeed might be a promising solution for the future of rural India.

Just  some miles away from the farm, the Bio Resource Complex is located. It is one of the almost 700 agricultural research, training and extension centers that tries to link scientific knowledge to local knowledge and tries to adapt technologies to local conditions and the diversity of rural practices. It is a classical example of what in the old days in Holland was called the ‘OVO drieluik’: the combination of Research, Extension and Education  (“Onderzoek, Voorlichting, Onderwijs”; OVO). This ‘OVO drieluik’ takes an important place in between science on the one hand and the agricultural practice on the other. But in India it doesn’t operate in the same old fashioned way as it was organized long time ago in The Netherlands; it is reshaped in a more  modern and sophisticated way. In part three I will go more into detail about this network of institutes that promotes the modernization of rural India in a new and very promising way.

Jan Schakel

The hostel offers 4 different daily newspapers, so my early morning tea starts with some Indian news; a lot on cricket, but also a lot on the political and economic situation of India. Which is not that good as many people in our country might think. India often is named together with China and Brazil as the new ‘Economic Powers’, the news shows a different story about that. For example, although Bangalore is called the ‘Silicon Valley of India’, the city (with almost 8 million inhabitants) faces so many and such a massive problems. According to the daily news, the city suffers violence, heavy pollution, corruption and an economic growth that gets stagnant.

Although India (with a population of 1.3 milliard) soon will overtake China as the world nr. 1 country with the highest population,  they do not manage to make this huge amount of labor supply productive in whatever way. Recent figures show for example that in Rural India, sixty percent survives with less than half a euro a day (the urban population spends almost 1 euro/day), and that 10 percent of the rural population lives on only 20 euro cents/day (urban poor spend just 30 euro cents/day). Some States or worse than others. For example the average  daily consumer expenditures in the State of Bihar (north east) are 44 (rural) and 70 (urban) cents a day, whilst in Kerala (the very south) these averages are resp. 91 and 120 cents/day. Notice that food takes about half of the expenditures (both in urban and rural areas). So food really does matter (“did you take food today”; see part 1). These figures (taken from the National Survey Sample, carried out between July 2009 and June 2010) shows clearly that India still has a long way to go to let their inhabitants profit of its growing economy. Every day, the newspaper pays attention to the necessary reforms that has to be undertaken to tackle the main political issues like poverty, inequality, pollution, bureaucracy and corruption.  But now I’ll go for a walk to ‘takkatakkatakk’; to do my daily shopping’s. Next time more about ‘farming and rural life in India’.

Students who enter into the IMRD program, have the opportunity to do a ‘specialized module’ in one of those ‘associated partner universities’ (the other 3 semesters has to be chosen out of Ghent, Berlin, Rennes, Nitra, Pisa or Wageningen). In this (‘spring’)semester, 3 IMRD students are in Bangalore: two of them (Basavaraj and Lauren) for their thesis (doing their data collection in India), and one (Tungaa) for the specialized module in agricultural economics.

And I am there too. I just arrived, and it feels like ‘Kuifje in India’. If you don’t know what it means, read the comics on Rintintin (“In Africa”, or “In the Soviet Union”), or read my notes which I will post the coming days on our RSO weblog. Arriving in Bangalore as a ‘visiting professor’ without too many preparations, it quite a ‘culture shock’. Not just because of the language (who told me they speak English in India?!), the climate, the food, the names, the conventions. Name it, it is different from ‘home’. A minor thing to mention: if people agree, they shake (or waggle) their head. It still confuses me that much. Another thing: if you meet somebody, they don’t say hello. They greet by asking: “did you have lunch”(or breakfast or dinner), and in general: “did you take some food”. I thought it was a real question, so I always answered seriously about my ‘eating habits’ (a long story….).

But that’s not the reason why I’m writing this blog. Next issue I will tell about life at a campus in India (I’ve been hosted in the ‘International Students Hostel’), about an University of Agricultural Sciences in Bangalore, about ‘global and local’ (the title of one of my seminars is called: “the horizon of relevance”), and above all: about life in India and the exchange of ideas, knowledge and expertise. But now I have some food first (vegetarian, because almost the whole of the Karnataka State is so). Although I am ‘heavy’ carnivore, I have no problem with eating here in Bangalore: I’ve never tasted such a delicious food so far in my life!

Jan Schakel

Written by Rineke Boonen.

Saturday the 28th of January the time was come. Four students from Wageningen University replaced Wageneningen for two weeks Cluj-Napoca in Romania. We went to the cold Romania (-20C!) to take part at the Intensive Programme (IP) with the subject:”Microbes and traditional Foods: Competitors or allies”.

Cluj-Napoca brought us two weeks of colleges, excursions, Ursus and a lot of Romania food. A time to remember and a real recommendation for anyone. I had a fantastic time in Romania. I met a lot of new people from a lot of different countries and new friendships were made. We couldn’t stop talking about the differences between our cultures and habits. It was also quit fun to learn the other students the Dutch language.Also the complaining about the Romania food from the university cafeteria made us feel like a real group. Because together we have enjoyed our daily portion of cabbage, potatoes and pork. The Romania wisdoms: ‘The best fish is meat’ and ‘pig is the best vegetable’ weren’t misplaced.

In the evening we also knew where to find the students pubs with the East-European prices. I have a lot of unforgettable memories about these nights. And when we didn’t feel that well the next day we toke an Holinka, because ‘Holinka cures everything’!Romania thank you for your hospitality!

Farmer driven transformation in the Netherlands: sustainable practices and struggles with the state

Dutch agriculture is one of the most productive in the world. This however seems to have come at a price. Disease outbreaks have led to the killing of more than 40 million animals in the last 14 years, it is the only EU country that does not comply to EU groundwater standards, it is the largest user of antibiotics for meat production in the EU, it ranks in the top 3 of the world’s largest pesticide users and the farming population has shrunk by 36% in 15 years. Policy efforts and huge investments in research seem to have brought little change to this. Farmer-led initiatives have however emerged that promise to tackle some of these problems. Frank Verhoeven (Boerenverstand bv) and Douwe Hoogland (chair Noardlike Fryske Wâlden) will talk about two farmer-led environmental co-operatives in the Frisian Woodlands, who, in cooperation with researchers, have devised system innovation by re-integrating dairy farming with nature conservation and landscape management. To realise this struggles with state policies were inevitable.

Intensive programme?

An ‘Intensive Programme’ (or IP) is a short study programme bringing together different EU member states’ students and teachers from higher education institutes to study a relevant topic, in this case: rural development. EU’s main motivation to finance these programmes is to encourage multinational learning and teaching in the EU. The Rural Sociology Group has been participating in IP’s on rural development for some years now. Last years’ IP, hosted by colleagues of Padova University, focused on ‘the role of agriculture in territorial identity’ and took place in the Belluno province in the Italian Dolomites. We have also participated in IP’s with other themes. More recent, colleague Petra Derksen participated in an IP on traditional foods and micro-organisms in Romania. In a series of posts on this weblog she, and participating students, reflect on their experiences in this programme.        

The role of agriculture and natural resources in sustainable rural development

This years’ IP, on rural development, focused on ‘the role of agriculture and natural resources in sustainable rural development’. The programme was hosted by colleagues from the Aleksandras Stulginskis University in Kaunas, Lithuania. Twenty tutors and more than forty students came together for two weeks to discuss and learn about (Lithuanian) rural development. Participants represented universities from: Slovenia, Hungary, Slovakia, Italy, Belgium, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Spain and the Netherlands.

First week: regional analysis

The programme started with a series of interesting lectures about the role of agriculture and natural resources management in the context of rural development. These lectures provided participants’ ‘luggage’ required for the main task that week: the regional analysis. For three days, the group was split up in subgroups which all visited one region. By visiting various sights and meeting many local actors (such as: government officials, nature protectors, entrepreneurs, members of so-called Local Action Groups (LAG’s), farmers etc.) students had to construct an image of the territorial identity of the given region (focusing on social-cultural or economic-environmental dimensions). Back at campus, participants worked on their analysis and presented their results with interesting presentations describing the visited areas.

The intensive first week was closed by some leisure time on Sunday. Most of the participants choose to ‘cool down’ by visiting two of the main touristic attractions of Lithuania: the beautiful town and castle of Trakai and Lithuania’s stunning capital Vilnius.

Second week: problem analysis and strategy development    

In the second week, new groups were made and students started working on a transversal problem analysis and strategy development of the visited regions. The analysis and strategy had to focus on one of the following themes: agriculture, non-agriculture, environment and landscape, social capital, institutional surrounding or cultural heritage. My group focused on environment and landscape. During the fieldwork, my students found a lack of cooperation and communication between stakeholders and identified this as one of the main problems concerning the protection of environment and landscape in the regions. Based on this problem, students developed a detailed strategy with activities aiming to enhance communication and cooperation between the stakeholders in the areas. Although, the group work wasn’t always easy, the final results and presentations of all six groups were impressive. The results, final presentations and their video’s are available on the IP website.     

For me, and other participants, the IP was a great opportunity to meet and work with people from other EU member states and to learn more about (European) rural development. Special thanks to our hostess professor Vilma Atkočiūnienė, Daiva Urmoniene, Renata Gelaziute and the Aleksandras Stulginskis University for the organisation and inviting us to Kaunas, Lithuania.

The PeerGroup is looking for artists and researchers willing to participate in their P.A.I.R. (Portable Artist in Residence) project. The P.A.I.R.-project promotes artistic social commitment while focusing attention on man and his surroundings. This year the P.A.I.R. theme is Landscape Population: the landscape and its meanings in relation to the inhabitants and other users will be looked at on different levels. The P.A.I.R. will be visiting the Wolden in the ‘Reestdal’, near the village De Wijk, in the north of the Netherlands (Drenthe) from the second half of September till the end of October to meet local inhabitants and to investigate their surroundings. On 13th of September also an art-route initiated by inhabitants will be opened in this area.

The Rural Sociology Group and the Peer Group are looking for a master student interested in landscape, place, values and population, who is enthusiastic to do his/her internship or thesis in this site-specific project, starting preferably around July-September. The student-researcher will actually stay in the P.A.I.R. (see photo) in September in the ‘Reestdal’ and participate with inhabitants. The P.A.I.R. will then partly be a ‘Reestdal-library’ and partly accomodation for the student-researcher. Preliminary research questions are:
- What is ‘sense of place’ for the local population in the Wolden?
- Which meanings to people give to the landscape? What do people appreciate? What are important cultural markers in the landscape?
- Do inhabitants experience local identities? Which stories can be told related to the landscape?
- How are meanings, identities and sense of place linked to underlying values of people?
- How can meanings identities and sense of place be translated to recommendations for practice and policy? (people’s participation, community cohesion, networks)
Methods that can be used are e.g. social (deep) mapping, visualization methods, appreciative inquiry, integral theory. The student researcher will carry out ‘on-site’ participatory research on the sense of place and values of the local population in this area. The research will be supervised by the RSO group (Ina Horlings) and the Peer Group (Henry Alles). If you are interested, please send a mail as soon as possible to Ina Horlings (lummina.horlings@wur.nl).