Beyond the Textbook: How Do You Run a “Teaching by Word and Example” Agricultural Training?

by Posted on

Foodthink Says

What kind of agricultural training do farmers need? Lao Liu (Huang Guoliang), who has spent nearly twenty years working on rural issues across the country, has something to say. In his view, to understand agricultural training, one must first answer what kind of knowledge system farmers need. A graduate of agricultural science himself, he believes the scientific frameworks taught in schools are not necessarily suited to farmers’ needs or to rural issues. “Teaching by word and example” is another system through which farmers pass on knowledge, yet it is all too often overlooked.

To put “teaching by word and example” into practice, Lao Liu has made many attempts. Previously, he and his partner, Senior Agricultural Technician Luo Lishuang, collaborated on several ecological agriculture training sessions in Guangxi, cultivating a group of fellow ecological farmer trainees.

After walking alongside Guangxi’s fellow ecological farmers for many years, what observations has Lao Liu made about them? And what advice does he have for new fellow farmers venturing into ecological agriculture?

This article has been compiled from episodes of the Food Talk podcast, with minor edits. Interested readers can also click the image below to listen to this episode’s audio.

– Scan the code to listen –

Foodthink will also invite Lao Liu and Luo Lishuang, along with two “little teacher” fellow ecological farmers, to host a three-day “Ecological Agriculture On-the-Ground Co-Building and Co-Learning Camp” on the outskirts of Guangzhou from 2 to 4 December this year. Registration and scholarship applications close on Sunday, 24 November; interested readers can view the poster for details.

I. A Dialogue Between Two Knowledge Systems

Ever since the various schools and philosophies of ecological agriculture were introduced to China, we have run many agricultural training programmes, trying to teach farmers how to farm using a single method — only to find that these programmes do not easily take root locally. One reason is that the transmission of experience in rural society and modern knowledge transfer are two entirely different systems. Modern knowledge is conveyed through the written word, captured in books. In rural society, however, knowledge is not necessarily passed on through writing; it is more often transmitted through teaching by word and example. Although today’s modern knowledge system is a highly mature professional framework, it still cannot fully address the real problems faced by rural communities.

Rural experience and wisdom that are not conveyed through writing can be transmitted through non-written systems and passed on with remarkable completeness. Why do some ethnic minority groups still retain more rural wisdom today? Simply because non-written systems are less affected by written ones. But once the foundations of everyday life that sustain this system of transmission disappear, talking about cultural preservation or trying to revive tradition becomes very difficult.

The logic behind the modern scientific system is specialisation, growing ever more granular: what you study determines what you do. The aim is to produce cogs in the machine, not whole human beings. Some time ago I watched a video in which a master’s student mentioned that his senior labmate, unable to properly classify all the microorganisms in the soil, would then question whether farmers’ self-made microbial fertiliser was scientifically sound. It is clear that the thinking cultivated by this system is remarkably narrow. Ecological agriculture, on the other hand, demands holistic knowledge, and the myriad situations that can arise in farming cannot be reduced to specific data.

This does not mean the written system is no longer needed; rather, we are trying to find ways to bridge the two systems.

So we adjusted our approach to ecological agriculture training: to try using “teaching by word and example” to build up accumulated experience, to take a different path, and to incubate a system of transmission from a small group of people. We focus on getting this first step right, then gradually consider how to bring local experience and the written word together.

● Lao Liu and his partner Luo Lishuang strive to link teaching with practice in every training session, aiming for all participating farmers to learn skills they can actually put to use.

II. Ecological Agriculture and Conventional Agriculture

When we ran training sessions, many of the participating farmers had previously been engaged in conventional cultivation, growing fruit trees with pesticides and chemical fertilisers. At first they found it quite strange — we were not teaching them how to use pesticides and fertilisers, nor were we covering pruning techniques. Yet they stuck with the programme, and some of them managed a successful transition. On one hand, we discussed alternatives to pesticides, chemical fertilisers and herbicides. And not just alternatives — we wanted them to learn how to think beyond these chemicals altogether. On the other hand, we wanted to convey the ecological-agriculture principle of matching crops to local conditions. Why had so many farmers done so much wasted work? Because from the very start they had chosen the wrong direction: the crops they selected were not suited to local natural conditions, which meant heavy external inputs (such as pesticides and chemical fertilisers) were needed to prop them up. Once everyone accepted these ideas, we could then introduce the importance of conserving local varieties, and the farmers were far more receptive.

● Advancing farmers’ work in variety conservation and breeding, and building a network of exchange among farmers in Guangxi, was another important task that Lao Liu used to oversee.

All of this depends on earning the farmers’ trust. They need to feel that what the teacher says is reliable and that they themselves can put it into practice — only then will they be open to the next idea. Only then can the training aim for a “leap of thought.”

Of course, once training ends, not everyone can sustain their commitment to ecological agriculture; real challenges remain. The first is the market.

How much should ecological produce be sold for? Which audiences should it target? From what I have seen, many people assume ecological agricultural products must be expensive to grow and costly to buy — this remains the prevailing view. Nowadays, the moment ecological produce is mentioned, everyone starts talking about the spending power of urban consumers.

But if the methods are right, the costs of ecological agriculture are manageable and the prices are competitive. For instance, some farmers in Guangxi have tried selling their produce in local county towns. They do not have to sell in major cities or charge a premium; even pricing just slightly above comparable products, they still enjoy a competitive edge locally.

As my partner Luo Lishuang says: “We choose ecological agriculture because it is a more advantageous way of farming.”

● A seasoned frontline agricultural worker and a trusted mentor and friend to farmers, Lao Liu’s partner Luo Lishuang has also appeared on the Food Talk podcast, sharing his views on agriculture and farmers today. Click the link to read the transcript: “More Principles, Fewer Farming Methods: What Kind of Training Do Farmers Need?”

When I first started working in ecological agriculture, I felt a strong sense of mission and believed it was the way forward for farming. Over the years, chatting with fellow farmers, I have noticed they share a similar deep conviction. But now I feel that such intensity of belief is not a good thing. There should not be an irreconcilable, do-or-die rivalry between ecological agriculture and conventional agriculture. The underlying principles of farming are universal. Whether one practises ecological or conventional agriculture, it is essential to understand soil conditions, biological characteristics, and the conditions under which pests and diseases arise. Farmers on both paths need to learn these things — it cannot simply come down to a declaration of “I do not use pesticides, chemical fertilisers or herbicides,” with everything else ignored.

Farming requires more than just physical labour; it demands that people learn, think, question, and gradually build up their knowledge.

Many people encounter a problem and do not think it through deeply. For example, during a lesson on techniques — how to make compost, how to prepare fermented preparations — they simply go home and follow the instructions. But why make compost? Why prepare fermented preparations? When should they be applied? Many farmers do not think any further than carrying out the task; they perform the actions without digesting the underlying principles or reflecting on their own situation — what state are the crops in? What condition is the soil in? What kind of balance do I need to achieve over the coming years of production?

That is why, in our training, we wanted to convey a key idea to farmers: you come here to learn in order to achieve breakthroughs in agricultural technique through your own initiative. It is not simply a matter of sitting through a lesson and going home to copy what was demonstrated — you need to return to your farm, observe, reflect, and keep on learning.

● Fellow farmers share their experience during a training session. “Teaching and learning grow together” has always been a hallmark of the farmer training sessions Lao Liu organises, and lasting friendships have developed between mentors and farmers.

III. New-Generation Farmers: Can Both Body and Mind Return?

Early this year, Foodthink and I jointly published a “Baseline Survey on Ecological Agriculture Training,” interviewing many fellow farmers and speaking with a number of partners over the phone. At first the aim was to understand technical needs, but other findings emerged along the way. We discovered that the new generation entering ecological agriculture have not yet fully thought through why they are doing it. Why agriculture? Have they truly prepared themselves to become farmers? If you run a farm as a business, as a start-up venture, without integrating it with the needs of daily life and production, those who enter will find themselves in a state of physical and mental disconnection.

When new-generation farmers return to the countryside to farm, do they have a clear sense of their own position and plans? Or are they always prepared to leave agriculture and switch to another industry to make money? In other words: the body may have “returned to the village” — but has the mind? This is a subtle state; the thoughts lurking in our subconscious shape the decisions we make.

If the mind has gone back, the way you measure the value of agriculture changes. Some fellow farmers have very clear goals — for instance, farming on the outskirts of a small county town or in the village, and making a surplus of 40,000 yuan a year is enough. Planning production around that goal — deciding which varieties the farm will grow, how much to plant — they will not feel too much pressure.

If the mind has not gone back, then your vision for your own future is still one of “fame and fortune.” Someone once told me he hoped to earn 8,000 yuan a month, and expected that half a mu of land on his farm could generate that 8,000 yuan. You use the logic of capital to price yourself, and then you must use the logic of capital to plan the farm’s production — but the land may not meet your return expectations.

In 2012, when I was working on the Dapinghuo Community Canteen in Chongqing, I discussed this with the partner farmers: ecological agriculture is production as a way of life, not factory-style production. On the farm, how much money do you need? How much can you earn? You plan production on that basis — it is a comprehensive arrangement.

● Tang Liang from Sichuan (first from the left in the left image) and Wei Guanghai from Guangxi (right image) are, in Lao Liu’s eyes, young returnees with clear plans and a good quality of life. To read Tang Liang’s talk with Foodthink this year, see “Twelve Years Back Home: First-Generation Left-Behind Children Reunite a Family Through an Ecological Farm | Food Talk Vol. 32.”

New-generation farmers now also face the “new three mountains”: elderly care, childcare, and healthcare. But the problems of agriculture and rural areas have never been solvable within agriculture and rural areas alone. Placing all that pressure squarely on the shoulders of farmers is deeply unfair. Expecting ecological agriculture to solve the problem of children’s schooling simply shifts the burden onto production — and then production, too, becomes a weight to bear.

Will rural development move forward or retreat? I am not an economist, and I cannot predict the future.

This summer I also visited Zhejiang and Shanghai and saw villages completely unlike those in Guangxi; Guangxi itself is showing signs of new villagers and young creatives moving into the countryside. These new trends are certainly possible, but they will take a long time to develop. People in the cities want a different trajectory in life, but when they arrive in the countryside they do not know how to farm. At that point, new needs arise in the village, new spaces for cooperation appear, and the vitality of the village may well be reignited.

Now that we are exploring ecological agriculture, we should not discuss technique alone. We need to think more broadly — at the personal, the familial, and the societal levels. Although most fellow farmers are still working to meet their basic livelihood needs, that does not prevent us from thinking further ahead, burying the embers for what is to come.

The small-scale ecological farmers who already have a clear sense of their own place are living well, proving that this path works. And they are beginning to consider how to, step by step, attract more people to the countryside, onto the path of ecological agriculture.

I often say to former colleagues that our work is aimed at the future, even if we cannot yet see results. Just as in the past, when we talked to others about conserving old varieties, they seemed to have no concept of it — but in the future these issues will become ever more important, and the seeds we have planted may take root and sprout in twenty or thirty years.

Foodthink Contributors
Lao Liu
Born Huang Guoliang, from Hepu, Guangxi, he has been engaged in rural reconstruction since 2005. He has participated in founding, in succession, the Ecological Agriculture Studio of the Yan Yangchu Rural Reconstruction Academy, Beijing Little Donkey Community Farm, the Chongqing Guoren Dapinghuo Community Canteen, and the Nanning Urban Farmers’ Market; established the Guangxi Guoren Rural Poverty Alleviation and Development Centre; and initiated the Guangxi Local Variety In-situ Conservation Platform. He is currently based primarily in Guangxi, working as an independent practitioner on ecological agriculture.

 

 

Compiled by: Chen Huiying Edited by: Wang Hao

Published by Foodthink