1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Approach

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Bern University of Applied Sciences, School of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences (HAFL) - Switzerland

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

09/11/2018

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

2.1 Short description of the Approach

The Experimental Farm Network is an online platform facilitating collaborative plant breeding as well as other sustainable agricultural research.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

The experimental farm network started when Nate Kleinman and Dusty Hinz saw the threats of climate change, and wanted to have an agriculture able to cope with it. Breeding for crops like trees, or perennial wheat, takes decades and is often part of university programs which phase out with the retirement of the responsible person. These are the reasons which lead the two to build up a decentralized network for plant breeding and other experimental farming techniques.

The network is online based, open source, and with a free access to everyone having an internet connection. In the network, there are two positions for each project: researcher and volunteer. A researcher who wants to start a project describes the goals, the needs from the volunteers, and the required climatic and soil conditions. A volunteer, who has a profile where the growing conditions are described, can sign up for the project. The researcher can then contact the volunteers which seem suitable, and send genetic material. Usually, the work involves planting the seeds, growing it out, measuring some characteristics (size, yield, etc.) and sending a part of the seeds with some data back.

The EFN is organized as a non-profit cooperative with two permanent employees and a board of advisors. The sources of income were initially a crowdsourcing and the sale of seeds. Financially it is not yet totally self-carrying, as the employees are working sometimes for free. With the increase of seed sales, also from experimental and diverse varieties, it is changing.

The website helps putting people in touch and keeping records of who is working on which project, as well as for volunteers to stay updated with the projects. Some projects, with annuals, are only short term, while others, for example with slow growing perennials, may need decades if not more to produce a selected cultivar or variety of a crop.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• recent local initiative/ innovative

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

Develop farming systems for a future, while tackling problems with climate change.

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	self-mobilization
planning	interactive
implementation	interactive
monitoring/ evaluation	none

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists

Explain:

Each volunteer grows a crop only if he or she wants to grow it, and gets support for it.

Specify on what basis decisions were made:

• evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)
• research findings
• personal experience and opinions (undocumented)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

Form of training:

• Support for the volunteers

Subjects covered:

Depending on the crop grown, the researcher helps with information about how best to grow it.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

No

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, moderately

• Online

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

The online network was established within the approach.

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

No

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• ecology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Breeding is always research for better adapted crops or varieties.

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

Indicate the annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach in US$:

10000.00

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Crowdsourcing was used in the beginning, now the sale of seeds is taking over in supporting the cooperative financially.

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

No

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• agricultural

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• voluntary

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

5.5 Other incentives or instruments

Were other incentives or instruments used to promote implementation of SLM Technologies?

No

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• uncertain

If no or uncertain, specify and comment:

It depends on the project, but usually the land users can continue to grow the crops they are testing as a part of the network.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Allows farmers who are isolated on the countryside to have research projects together with others.
Allows a decentralized approach, in which the research can continue even if the initial researcher did not continue.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The transparency allows other projects to be inspired to do similar breeding projects.

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Some volunteers only take the seeds, and do not give back as promised.	EFN wants to implement a rating system for volunteers, in a way that researchers can see if they are reliable.
Some people do not want to create an account in another social network.	They can contact some researchers directly, and work without having an account. This requires more organisational work for the researchers, but is done by some.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
As an english speaking platform, it crosses many countries, while some seed regulation do not allow imports or translocations of genetic material due to the risks of disease transfer.	Arrange the platform into countries where adequate.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Plant Breeding and Farmer Participation, Ceccarelli et al., 2009,ISBN 978-92-5-106382-8

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1070e/i1070e00.htm

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

Experimental Farm Network website.

URL:

https://www.experimentalfarmnetwork.org/