west;

3" f ”.4"
JJ/'*'

.4)

Date

0—7639

NIVERS ITY LIBRARI

llllllllllllllllll’llllllll lllllilllll

31293 01413 2512
LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

llllllll

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
Sustainable Development, A Collaborative Process:

Lessons From A Rural County's
Development Project

presented by

Catherine Renee Wiersma

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M.A. degree in Sociology

7/,W
Marilyn Aronoff

Major professor

 

11/4/94

MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

-—--—~r 'W WV” wfiv‘v- —m v W'-m wv—wh

~,. - T—v —..'_. . ——-

- ‘- -v—

PLACE ll RETURN Box to remove We checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

I

   
     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU IeAnNfinnetivertlon/E O Initiation
(pet pponunuy

m1
, H——_

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, A COLLABORATIVE PROCESS:
LESSONS FROM A RURAL COUNTY'S
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

By
Catherine ReneeWiersma

A THESIS

Subm'tted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTEROFARTS

1994.

ABSTRACT
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, A COLLABORATIVE PROCESS:

LESSONS FROM A RURAL COUNTY'S
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

BY

Catherine Renee Wersma

Drawing on the model of Collaborative Management for sustainable
developmentproposedbyMidnael Reddilt(1987), thestrengthsandweeknesses
of a corrposting demonstration project in a rural county in Michigan are exam‘ned.
Research data was colleded through in-person interviewswith key figures involved
at various levels of the project and through a review of documents, primarily
Mchigan's Right to Farm files. The lonia case study, while demonstrating the
tensions between outsiders' managerial goals and insiders' knowledge and the
benefits of incorporating loml knowledge in the planning stage of development,
also illustrates the difficulty of organizing a planning group in which all of the
diverse interests are adequately represented. These findings suggest that only
through a proceesthat involvesthosemostafiected bychangeand issensitiveto
the loml environmental, eoonom'c,and social concerns an truly sustainable
development take place. I '

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am deeply indebted to Marilyn Aronoff for her guidance and support
throughoutrwstudyandforhercontinued effortsin helping meprcduceafinal
draft. I alsowish toaclmowledgemycomntteen'enbers, LawrenceBusd1
and Christopher Vanderpool, and thank them for their suggestions. Craig Harris
also deserves many thanks for his comnents and critique. Finally, I would like
to thank my fam'ly, Shelly, Neva, and Rick for their love and encouragement.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
PERSPECTIVES ON SUSTAINABILITY
METHODS
CASE OF IONIA
Setting
Chronology of events
ANALYSIS
CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

11
13
16
25

31

LIST OF FIGURES

The Redirection of Environmental Management
Chronology of Project Events

11
21

INTRODUCTION

Piers Blaikie began a recent presentation with these words, "Sustainability
hasmnanenduringconwpt. ltcffersscrrethingfcralmcsteveryoneandits
broadest definition in the sense of 'keep going' and 'give strength to' is difficult to
disagree with" (1994). A definition of Sustainability such as 'keep going' is too
amorphous to be of any practical value. A workable definition of sustainability
needsto describe Matought to be keptgoing, why, and byandforwhom.

In the literature on sustainability, have identified three different uses of the
conwpt "sustainability." erat is being sustained is the differentiating factor
betweenthevarioususages. First, sustainabilitymaybeusedinapurely
environmental sense, to describea state in which an eccsystemorresourcesuch
as soil is being preserved. Second, sustainability is used to describe a state in
which the dual goals of econcm'c development and environmental protection are
sought. Finally it is used to describe the integration of eccncm'c viability with
environmental protection and ccrmunity quality of life in development decisions.

Cunently in Michigan, projects are underway to meet these three
developmental objectives in an initiative to increase the livestock industry (Connor
1987). In my view, projects are most viable when they include a social

corrponent. If development is to be sustainable it must include local participant's
knowledge of their environmental, eccnorn‘c, and social concerns. Drawing on the
mrkofMdiaelReddifl,whobred<swifl1tradifionalfonnschhirdV\bdd
development inmhichexpertsrranageprojectsaccordingtotheirovmwisdorn I
will exam'ne the suceessss and failures of a rural Mchigan agricultural
development projed that sought to involve Ioeal people.

In this paper, I will use the definition of sustainability that incorporates a
social ccrrponerttoanalyzetheerperiencesofa rural county inWestemMichigan
involved in the state's livestock expansion initiative. In thisccunty, a small *
ccnm'ttee of local people representing various agricultural interests was
' asserrbled to find alternative waste rranagementstrategies. lwill beginvm'th some
background infomlation on Michigan's Livestock Initiative telling how lonia county
bewreimdvedandnextdesaibeingreaterdaailthethreedifierentusesof
sustainabilityandthelinitationsofeach usage. I then presentan overviewofmy
rnethodsand adescriptionofthecounty inMichtheprcjecttcck place, followed
by my analysis ofthe project's acccrrplishmentsfrcmasustainabledevelcpment
standpoint. In the conclusion, I will outline scrne of the problems in achieving
collaborative outcomes in our society.

BACKGROIND
. Stimulated by the state's animal industries, the Michigan legislature
appropriated more than $70 rrillion to expandthe state's livestock industry in 1993-

3
94. Cunenflyagficultureissecondtotheautoindusfiyasanejorconfiibutorto

the state's economy, adding approximately $14 billion each year. Livestod< and
animal specialty farms conprised over 40 percent of the total farms in Michigan
in 1987. These 21, 213 farms accounted for approximately 4.3 trillion acres of
land in Michigan, including 2.4 trillion acres of harvested cropland. Dairying was
thelargestlivestocktypeoffamingfolloued bybeeftettle, hogs, horsesand
poultry (Connor et. al., 1987).

Key figures in Md'iigan's agriculture agencies — Michigan State University's
Cooperative Extension Service (CES) and Agricultural Experiment Station (AES),
the Soil Conservation Service (808), and the Mchigan Departrrent of Agriculture
(MDA) - estimate that through the efforts of the livestodr expansion initiative,
agriculture could boost its contribution by $1 billion and create up to 22,000 new
jobs. Wnile these econom'c inwntives of expansion are easily understood, they
are nctsoeasily achieved, bemuse tl'leexpansionoftl'lelivestockindustryvfill
not only bring nillions of dollars into the state's economy, but will also bring tons
of manure into the state's barns. For exan'ple, one dairy cow will produce 21.9
tons of manure a year. Just inegine the pile that would accumulate if Michigan
were to add only 50,000 dairy cows.

Recognizing the potential problerrs livestock expansion night bring (i.e.,
manure storage, odor, and land applieation problems), a Manure Managerrent
Task Force was appointed by the heads of Michigan's key agricultural agencies to
develop manure managen'ent alternatives for the livestock industry which would

4
insure that animal production be conducted within state environmental constraints,

continue to benefit the state's economy, help maintain the economic health and
w'ability of livestock farms, and address the potential conflicts between livestock
producersand urban new-ccrnersto rural areas(TF 1)1 . To help achievethese
goals, the taskforce's Program Planning and Implementation Committee solicited
proposals from local areas in the state interested in developing a nanure
management demonstration project that night provide manure management
alternativesfor produwrsthroughoutthestate. Arequestforpropcsalswassent
to all Cooperative Extension Service offices, Soil Conservation Service offices,
and Soil andWaterConsenraticn Districtcffices. Thedocumentssuggestedthat
those interested areas identify a "coalition of local support" to assist with the
planning and implementation of the project (Loudon memo 1992).

In October 1992, loniaCountywasawardedthegrantforapropcsed
project focusing primarily on composting as an alternative manure management
strategy. ThecountYsproposalwasdevelopedoversevelalmonthsbya
committee reunited by county CES and 808 personnel that included livestod<
produeers, an agricultural supplier, and community leaders including a city
manager, the county drain commissioner, and a county commissioner. In addition

toleamingaboutthetedrniealaspedsofflecompcstingpmceesandflievalue

 

1To preservetheanonynityofthepeopleweinterviewed, l havecodedtheir
citations as "TF" for task force member, "LP" for local planning comm'ttee member,and
"NP' for a person nominated by a Ioeal planner. Within each category the persons
have been numbered in no particular order to differentiate between them

5
of compost as a fertilizer, the local planning committee identified specific concerns
in their community, such as finding an alternative disposal method for city leaves
and yard waste, creating an affordable alternative manure handling system, finding
a more efficient nethcd fortransporting manure greater distances, and addressing
concems of fanners living in close proximity to non-faming neighbors.

The lonia planning group project was lead by the state's Program Planning
and Implementation Conmitteetospecifythreemainareasofconcernthattheir
nanure management plan had to addrees: the economic viability ofthe system,
theenvironmental impactcfthesystem, andthesocial responsibilityofthesystem
Theseconmmswelefomally addressed in theirgrantprcpcsal andalso informally
conveyed in our interviews with each member. Thus, although they did not use
thetemrinologyofsustainability, theexpressedconcernsreflecttl'lesamethree
elements that have become the foundations of key sociolOgiral definitions of
sustainable development. In the next section, I will summarize three different
sociological perspectives on sustainable development; concluding with Michael
Redcl'rft's approach to collaborative development which will be the basis for my
assessment ofthe nanure management demonstration project inlonia. My own
analysis suggests that the planning and implementation committee's statewide
nission undercuts the "knowledge" of local planning committees which relates to
the Managerial/Collaborative issues in Redclift's scheme. The definition of the
Ioniaeffortasadermnstration prcjectforthe statewide implementation established
adevelopmentagendabeyondthesccpeoflccalneedsandespacities.

PERSPECTTVES ON SUSTAINAEE DEVELOPMENT

The concept of sustainability has received substantial attention in the last
decade. The term "sustainability" is used by government policy makers,
international aid agencies, the popular media, and academics. The concapt is
cantraltomanycurrentnatural resourcesdebates, anditiswidelyusedin
development rhetoric It has become an "attractive political banner, possibly
attaining the prominence of multiple-use or environmentalism" (Gale & Cordray
1994). "Sustainability is invariably used to describe a goal which, superficially at
least, is indisputably desirable" (Dixon & Falon 1989).

Within the sociological literature, I have found three distinct uses of the term
sustainability. Vlhile each one makes a useful contribution to improving the
planned use of natural resources, each one also has key limitations which I will
briefly note. In one category of definitions, 'Sustainable' is used in reference to a
purely physical conwpt for a single resource or an ecosystem Literature using
sustainability as a physical concept usually seeks to define physical limits to
resource exploitation, or the maximum sustainable yield (MSY). The goal in these
situafionsisflenanagemefiofareremableresourcebyregulafingmerateof
exploitafimsomatflesystemcannaintainnsefiinflefaceofextanalshodr
(Conway 1987). Used in this context, however, it ignores economic forces and
social impacts (e.g., social responses to changes in the resource base, technology
changes, consunerdemand changes), and itdoes not reflect howenvironments
are continually transformed by economic growth and by environmental users.

7
Asecond approach to sustainability describes a state in which resources are

being conserved while production and profits are being maintained. Frequently,
however, tiegoalsofeconomicgrwvthandenvircnmental preservation areseen
as conflicting. Mitch of the 'sustainable agriculture' literature falls into this
production-oriented category focussing on problerrs of environmental
contamination and human health problems due to pesticides and plant fertilizers,
soil erosion andthedegradation ofthe soil, and lowfanninccmes resultingfrom
depressedcomrnodity prices in thefaceofhigh productioncosts(Lod<eretz 1991).
In a 1988 brochure, the USDA stated that its low input sustainable agriculture
(USA) program"helps kcepiamleis profitablebyimproving nanagementskillsand
reducing the need for chemicals and other purchased inputs. It helps sustain
natural resources by reducing soil erosion and groundwater pollution and by
protecting wildlife."

Unfortunately this literature also neglects the social dimension of
sustainability. Patricia Allen and Carolyn Sachs have recognized the negled of
social concerns in the literature on agricultural sustainability. "In general,. . .
predominant efforts in sustainable agriculture ignore its human factor or constitute
itshunanissuestooexclusively. . . . Social problensandpriorities. . . areusually
not included in sustainability definitions" (1993).

, A third approach to sustainability, uses the term to define a state of social,
environmental, and economic well-being. Sociologists and researchers such as
. Kseney and Blaikie have called for the incorporation of social systems analysis in

8

studies of sustainability. Keeney includes a social component in his definition
saying that sustainable agriculture includes "agricultural systens that are
environmentally sound, profitable, and productive and that maintain the social
fabric of the rural community" (1989). Blaikie goes a step beyond merely defining
sustainability. He proposes a political economicflamework through which a "very
old therre" may be viewed from a "new perspective " (1994). This new
perspective combines tools of social and natural science, accommodates various
scales and levels of analysis including local level analysis, and it links national
policies to local practices in a critical way.

In his book, Sustainable Development, Michael Reddift uses a political
econonicfi'amework to critiquethe global development relationships between First
Worid capitalists and Third World indigenous people. He calls for the incorporation
of local or indigenous knowledge ofecological preservation in thefonral structure
of environmental planning in developing countries. Redclift argues that the current
form of environmental managerialism ignores or devalues the experiences of the
very people who are closest to the problems. Managerialism dictates to the
indigenous peoplenot onlythespacewithinwhiditheymayoperateandtheends
theymustachieve, butalsotl'letechnologytheymay useto reachthoseends.

Such a system interferes with the culturally mated strategies devised over
time by local actors to reduce risk and preserve their livelihoods. Throughout their
history indigenous people have gained an intricate understanding of the diversity
and productivity potential of their local eccsystern; and they have developed simple

9
technologies with which they can exploit the local resources at a level that

maintains their livelihoods and social systems even in the face of major ecological
disturbances. Redclift points out that First Worid developers' exploitation of
resourcesdegradesthelocal environmentand insodoingdestroystheabilityof
local people to naintain livelihoods based on their traditional methods. Hence, this
development is unsustainable because it putsthe environment and local social and
econorric systems at risk Therefore, Redclifl argues that for sustainable
development to becorre a reality, it is nececsary for local knowledge to be given
prior“!

"Episterriological questions, such as how people understand their

relationships with their environnent, are essential to a more sustainable

development. Theyarenotmerelyadesirableconsideration in better
planning, but. . . are the very stuff of which environmental management

could be made" (1987).

To design development practices that are more compatible with local
communities, we need to understand how local people organize their knowledge
of their environment and their social systems. In figure 1, Redcl'llt illustrates the
redirection required to move to a more "collaborative view of environmental
managementwhichtakesitscuesfromtheenvironmental useisratherthanthe
outside experts." It seeks to reverse the process through which 'we' do all the
managing, while 'they' live within the space, and with the tools, that we provide.

Enviormrlal Eriwomerial
Planers Users
Land-use planning defines thdr space
Technology appraisal defines 'their production
, system
Structural policies defines 'their’ market]
state links

Enviormerhl Erwiiomprlal
Uws Plamers
Geographical and defines land-use
cultural boundaries planning
Indigenous knowledge defines technology
and ecological adaptation appraisal ,
Household livelihood - defines stnictural
requirements policies

Figue1 TireRecieclionofEiwnrorlrerlalMamgenert

Like Allen, Blaikie, Kseney and Redclilt, I will argue that the concept of
sustainability must include a social component. And like Reddift I will go beyond
analyzing the inpact of economic and environmental development policies on local
communities to incorporating local lmowledge in the development plans. I will

 

2 Adapted from Redcl'ift, M. 1987. Sustainable Development. London:
Methuen & Co. p. 158.

10

11

argue that local participation should begin with the very first step of deciding on
arcasfordevelopmentbasedon local needsand identifyingtheproblemsofthe
proposed development schemes; and it should include prioritizing, agenda setting
and inplementing altemative solutions. Finally, I will argue that those helping to
setfleagendafordevelopmentmareprmawiderangeofdifieientlocal
stakeholders -forthe purpose ofthis paper, stakeholdersaredefined asthosewith
an interestorastakeintheoutcomeofdecision naking procecses; inthecase
oflonia, thisindudesnon-fannresidentsandrepresemmivssofdifierentsizesand
types of livestock production operations.

'l'heooldwaysoftopdmndecision maldnng'llnolongerwork
Collaborative management strategies are, therefore, necessary. However,
collaborative strategies may confront challenges in areas in which populations and
knowledge are more diverse, and lees tied to the environment. In my conclusion,
I will outline some of the problerrs in achieving collaborative outcomes in our

society.

IllE11-IODS
Myresearchdevelopedinthecontextofalargerprojedexaminingthe
social impacts of the livestock initiative's plan to expand animal agriculture in the
stateinwhichlwasaresearcl'iassistant. Mycasestudyfocuseson arural
county of Western Mchigan in which a planning committee of local residents
proposedaprojecttoaddresslocal nanuremanagenentconcernsinresponseto

12
a statewide request for alternative nanure management strategies.

Aspartofthecasestudyofthelonia Demonstration Project, astrategywas
developed bythesenicr researcherto interview several membeisof the state level
Mlanure Management Task Force's Program Planning and Implementation
Committeefromwhomwe learned aboutthecontext in whichthetaskforcewas
conceived and the state wide request for alternative management strategies was
born, all twelve nerrbers of the local planning committee, and several key people
in the county nominated by members of the local comrittee including local

producers cunently participating in the project as well as producers interested in
composting. Future research will include interviews with non-faming rural
residents.

Prior to interviewing Human Subjects approval was granted from the
University committee. Mlost interviews were concluded by Milo-interviewers at the
home or office of the interviewee and lasted approximately two hours. Handwritten
notes were taken as those being interviewed answered nine open-ended
questions. This interview fomat allowed for tangents to be explored and follow up
questions to be asked. Before each interview began the interviewees were
assuredofthetheirconfidentiality andfieedcmtonotansweraquestionwith
whichtheyfelt unconfortable(asofyet, noonehasrefusedtorespondtoa
' question). .

The strategy developed by the senior researcher also included a review of
'. documents and particularly Right To Famn (RTF) files as a way of becoming more

13
farriliar with the nature of nanure management problens around the state.3 We

read the complaint files for lonia and Ottawa counties. This was done to gain a
betterunderstandingofthepointsofcontentioninthecountywewouldbe
studying. Ottawawaschosenbecauseofthenmberandtypeofproblemsitis
facingasaiesultofurbansprawlexceedthoseofthesmallerloniacmmunities.
Ottawa county is quickly becoming suburbanized as people from Grand Rapids
moveawayfromthecity. "Whendevelopmentoccurs inarural area, new
residentssometimestakeoffenseatthenoise, odors, anddustthatnececsarily
accompanyfarning" (H3. 4054). In addition to giving mea basic understanding
of problerrs related to nanure such asodor, flies, spillageon roads, and ground
and surface water contamination, thefiles alsogavemea basic understandingof
different manure handling systems and the problems associated with each.

CASEOFIOMA

"Theywanttoexpand, buttheyhaveallthatdamn manureoutthere
limiting the possibilities of expansion."
FD, 1994

 

3 The RTF was established in 1981 to provide protection for Michigan famers
from public or private nuisance suits if the famer conformed to the generally Wed
agriculture practices or if the farm existed before any nearby (within one mile)
development and would not have been a nuisance before that development occumed.
(H. B. 4054). If a nuisance complaint is made, MDA officials visit the farm and the
complainant to verify the complaint. Written records are kept on all visits made since
1990.

14
An understanding of the basic underpinnings of the lonia County

demonstration project, andsomlekeychangesthathaveoccurredthatdeparted
from the local planning committee's expectations provide a necessary foundation
for understanding the project's accomplishments from October, 1992 when it was
funded, tothepresent,andfiamemyevaluationofitsachievementsand
shortcomings. Beforepresentingtl'lechronologyofeventsthattookplaceintl'le
project, I will give a brief description of lonia County, highlighting key
characteristics that influenced the development of the demonstration project.

Selli'ig
lonia County is located in Western Michigan midway between and

approximately 35 miles away from Grand Rapids and Lansing. Although set
betweentwourban centers, it is predominantlya rural countywith a population of
57,024. According to the 1990 census about 24,500 of the non-institutionalized
people consider themselves nJral non-farm residents (lonia pie-proposal 1992).
All ofthe lonia residentswithwhomwespcke considered oridentifiedthemselves
to be rural people, rather than either urban or suburban.

According to lonia's city manager, agriculture is the number one industry in
the county. However, a dairy producer with whom we spoke placed agricultural
development behind industrial development and job creation in terms of its
importance in the county (LP 8). Regardlecs of its position, agriculture is a very
significant part of lonia's economic base; and livestock production is an important

15
and large part of this agriculture industry. Over 50 percent of the 00qu total
acreage is in cropland (Plan for Planning 1994).

Forproducersandsomeotherresidents, tiereisalomingfearthatthe
future of agriculture in the county is on shaky ground. "Because of its proximity
to the large metropolitan areas lonia County is expected to growl' (lonia pre-
propcsal 1992). This issupported byttemostreceritcerstsdatawhidishows
thatbetween 1980and 1990lonia'surban population increasedby 1.8percentand
the rural population increased by 14 percent. These numbers are very similar to
the percent increasesforthepreviousdecade. "These peioeritchangesindicate
a growing trend toward greater rural inhabitants and consequently an increased
infringement upon rural resources" (Plan for Planning 1994).

Another emerging trend in lonia is the increase in new housing located
outside of the cities and villages (Plan for Planning 1994).. The population is
gradually dispersing to more niral areas. An older dairy farrrer laments that good
agricultural land is being sold cfffor houses. This isechoed inthewordscfthe
citymanager, "l'l'hereis] still alctoffanrersandfamiandinthecountyalthough
it's breaking up." One of the problems associated with urban people moving to the
country is their lack of understanding offarming practices (NP 1). As one local
agency staffer noted, another problem is their different definition of nonral smells.
"Urban and rural were totally separated, but now the buffer zones are getting
thinnerandallofasuddentheodors,thenoise,thesightsarenotnomal"(LP3).
lnthewordsofoneloniadaiiyfanrer, "Let'sgetrightdovmtothepoint.l

16
personally believethatmcstof these people don't care ifyou'reoutthere polluting
theland. ‘l'heycareifthestuffstinks"(NP4).

Thelad<ofcounty-widezoning ordinances contributestotheflustration felt
bysomefamrerswl'ioseegocdagricultural land being parcelledoffinthreetofive
acrelotsandbeingsddtofamiliesfianGrandRapids.Thegeneialsenfimentas
explainedbyotl'ierthhwhomwespokeisthatpeopleinloniajustdonotwant
tobetoldeiattodoorhowtofamn(LP's4&8; NP 1). Onlytwoofthe
townships in lonia have passed zoning laws. Others have tried but have failed.
"Peoplecomeheretotakeastand"responded acountycommissionerwhen
asked why zoning is so hotly contested in lonia (LP 4). The county is cunently
working on a plan for development which includes land use planning, but its
prospedsforsuccessareuncartain.

Ctroriclogy of eioiis

lnthefall of 1992, theState level taskforcesolicited proposalsfiom local
areas interested in developing a manure management demonstration project. In
lonia, thelocal CESandSCSagentsorganizedacommitteeofin muntymenbeis
they thought would be interested in planning a manure management demonstration
project. The local planning committee identified four main issues that manure
management should addrecs in their county: the protection of soils and water
fromnutiient contamination, analternativedispcsal methodforcityleavesandyard
waste in response to the impending ban on landfilling these materials, a more

17
efficient neansoftransporting manure, andthereduction ofodor. And ofcourse

thesolutiontotl'ieseproblemshadtobeeccnmical in ordertobeconsidered by
producers.

Theccmmitteecameupwithcompcsting. Composting isamethodof
transferring manure into a stable soil-like material which provides nutrients, organic
matter and other soil improving qualities while, unlike manure, being virtually
odorlecs (Rynk 1994). Composting manure greatly reduces its volume, moisture
and odors; thus making it easier to store if immediate land application is not
possible, more easy to transport to fields in need of nutrients, and potentially more
I marketable than raw manure.

Composting also addrecses conwms about soil and water contamination.
Thecomposting processchangesthefomnofthenutrientsintl'iemanuretl'lus
reducing the lisk of nitrm leading and allowing for phosphorous to be moved
away from areas of high soil concentration. "During the compost procecs, nitrogen
is bound in the organic fomn resulting in less leaching of nitrates into groundwater"
(lonia pre-pioposal 1992). Composting also has economic benefits. It provides
moreccstsaving manuredisposal than methodssuchaslagoonorslunystoiage
which are not only costly to build but also require expensive machinery for land
application. Costsavingscanalsoberealizedwithtl'lepurchasecffewer
- commercial fertilizers. Using compost will not completely eliminate the need for
commercial fertilizers, butasonedairymanwithwi'lomwespokeputit, "One
._ hundred cows and their offspring produce $10,000 worth of fertilizer" (LP 9). That

18
savesalotond'remicals.Alsoweedseedsandbacteriathatmayhavebeen

presentintheiawmanurearekilled inthecomposting procecsbytempeiature
reachingabove150degrees Fahrenheit, thusreducingtheneedforherbiddesand
pesticides.

Otter benefits of composting are more difficult to measure in dollars, the
improvement in soil tilth and fertility for example. There are also economic
advantages to reducing pollution, runoff, and odors as well as providing better
fiansponaflonopfions.111esepradicescanbeseenascostsaansthhregard
to increased protection against nitrate contarrination of water wells, neighbor
acceptance, and greater derrand for the product.

In addition, a cost savings for municipalities can be realized with lower
disposal costsfor leaves which soon will be banned from landfills. Or in the case
of lonia, it will reduce the pollution by providing a disposal method other than
depositingtheleavesintheflood plain oftheGrand Riverand lettingthespiing
showers wash their problems down stream

Thus, composting met the criteria for an alternative manure managerrent
system that the local planning committee established. It promised to provide an
economical manure handling system that would address conwms about
envirormental conta'n'nation, odor, transportation, andithelpedsolvethecity'sleaf
disposal problem, as well.

The local committee planned on finding two sites for their corrpost project.
Onewastobelocatedata poultry operationwi'iichwaslargeenoughto run a

19
composting programofitsowm. Theothersitewastobelocatedatalocal dairy

famn Thissitewasanticipatedasacoopeiativeeffortbetweenagroupofarca
famersandthecityoflonia. Theassociationof famrerswould bring their manure
tothecommonsite in retumforashareinthefinal product. 'l'hecitywould
providethecarbonsourceinthefonnofleavesandyardwastes. The
expedationsoftieplanningcommitteecanbestbesummanzedbyoneofits
memberswho said, "I've always, fromthevery beginning looked atthis as away
fortwoseparateentitiestocometogettertoenhancearelationshipthathasnot
always hen easy to enhance" (LP 4).

In October, 1992theTaskforce awarded lonia Countythegrantandwith
local support hired a project coordinator to oversee the management of the project.
It is important to note that the CES agent who organized the local planning
comfitteeandhadbeenresponsibleforvwifingflemajomtyoftiegraMpmposal
leftthecounty approximately6monthsaflertheprojectvasfunded. The
incoming project coordinator had no previous ties to lonia county. He was not a
local personthoughhehadvaluableexpemencewithcomposfingtedinologythat
is widely respected by local planning committee members. This change in
leadershiphassurelyaffectedtheopeiationoftheproject, although inwaysthat
cannotbelmmnpredsely.Asmecomnfleememberputit,'11eprojedwould
look different in general. It would be progressing to a reasonable end. You can
'whatifforeverandever" (LP 3). However, placinganoutsiderinthecoordinator's
positionofalocal demonstrationprojectincreasestl'lepotentialfcrconflidbetwleen

20
local knowledge and the "managerial" goals ofthe state.

Project Planning Phase
7-28-92: Initial proposal submitted to task force
9-23-92: Final proposal presented to task force

10-28-92: Local planning committee infomed that demonstration project will be
located in Ionia

Project Implementation Phase
12-06-92: Begin search for project coordinator
3-08-93: Hire project coordinator
5-01-93'. Landfill becomes first demonstration site
' 515-93: CES agent involved in planning leaves Ionia (approximate date)
Present Ongoing Ionia project activity simultaneous with efforts to extend
composting technology statewide
Figle 2 CI-RONQOGY OF PRQECT- EVENTS

In the project's implementation phase, problems were confronted in
establishing a collective of local producers and subsequently the deterioration of
the city's cormitment to deliver leaves to the project. Therefore, plans shifted to
utilize an area landfill as the host site for the project and to encourage individual
producers to participate by composting their own manure on their own famn "It is
turning outwaydifferentthanthecommittee imagined itwasgoingto" (LP 11). Of
thethreemainexpectationsexpressedbythecormittee, namelyleamingthe
techniques of composting, establishing an association of producers to set up a

21

cooperative site, and building a mutually beneficial relationship betwmn the cities
and the agriculturalists, the project has only been successful in achieving one.
Theyhaveleamedaboutthepmceesofconpostinganddifierentmethodsand
tools to be used in its production.

Todatetheprojectmanagers‘haveexperimentedethcomposting in
different seasons, including winter which they were told would not work by the
Luebke's of Austria (LP 2); - they discovered that the procees requires more labor
andtakes longer inthewinterbutmanurewill compost— using differentcarbon
sources, leaves, straw, sawdust, and culled pine trees for example; turning the
piles using different machinery5 or not tuming the piles at all; preventing nitrogen
leaching through the use offleece blankets“, tarp covers, and no covering at all;
usingdiffererltsurfacessudiasapad7constructedofmishedconcrete,a

 

4Acoregroupoffournenemergedtooverseethedailymanagerrerrtofthe
project. This group indudesthe project coordinator, two SCS staff members and a
MSUgraduatestudent

SCompostmustbemixedortumedtopreventtl'levwndrowsfrombecoming
anaerobic-asituationthatcausesafementingtypeofodor. Turning can bedone
byhand,aswithapitchfork,orbynachine. Frontendloaderscanbeusedorspecial
machines built forthesole purposeoftuminga pile can bepurchased. Various
modelsexist-somestraddlethevwndmotheisrunalongsideofit,andsomeare
selfpropelled—andiangein pricefrorn$15,000 to $150,000.

6Fleece blankets are a non-woven geotextile which is UV resistant and repels
water, yet it allows forthe exchange ofgases. A 150 yard blanket costs $350.

7If the land does not meet certain criteria (e.g., slope of 2-6°/c, depth of water
table greater than 2 ft., slight risk of penncability) the On Famn Composting Handbook
recommends a pad or special surface be constructed to prevent nitrate leaching.
Pads may be paved surfaces or surfaces constmcted of6 inches of compacted gravel
orsand. Costsvarygreatlydependingonsizeandtypeofsurface.

22
naturally sloping field a flat field; and adding sand or clay to simulate different

beddingmethodsfanrersmightuseandtheireffedoncmposting. Theproject
nanagersalsosetuptestplotstoconparetheaffedofrawnanure,compostand
chemicalfertilizersoncomyields. Theresultsfromthefiistyearareinconclusive.
lnerpemmenfingwifllflresedifieremsmnamosflieyhopedtoaddrecsfames
concernsandfind solutions which wouldbeapplicable throughoutthestate.
Although the project has succeeded in learning about various techniques
involved in the composting procees, it was not succeesful in establishing a
commonsitewiereanassociationoffamerswouldworktogether. Itseerrsas
ifinthelocal planningmeetingspeopleperceivedeacl'lothers'goalsvery
differently. Somewereundertheimpiecsionthataproducerontheplanning
corrmittee would provide the site. This, however, did not happen, and the
committee had a difficult time finding another site possibly because producerswere
wordedthatflieownerofthesitewouldhavetobepemrittedasasolidwaste
facilitybytheDlNRinordertoacceptthecityleaves(LP's4&8; W1) An
extensionagemexplainedttatorecfflefamneis'fearsisfliatiffleDthas
gdngtobepddngamundtheirfamninspecfingtteconpostoperafionsooreror
latertheywouldfind something elsethatwasbeingdonewrong(NP 1).
NotonlywasfearoftheDNRanexplanationbut,fearofspreadingdiseases
' and increased laborwere also reasons given to explain the problem offinding a
site(LPs4,5&8).Onecomrnueememberhypofl1esizedfliatmaybefl1erewas
nocooperationtheietobeginwith. Anothernotedthatfamreisareindependent

23
people who like to do things their own way. This explanation will be looked at
further in the analysis section ofthe paper.

Wnen the committee failed to find an arcs producer to host a comnon site,
theproject coordinatorventtotheomrerofthecounty landfill. Heheardthatthey
wereinterested in doingsomecmpostingontheirown becauseofthe pending
yardwaste ban (NP 3). An agreementwasstrudt in vwiichtheproject coordinator
would organize the whole enterprise and the landfill would cover the expenses for
thepadand nececsaryequipmerrt. Mlanureand strawpad<were brought in bytwo
area dairyfamrersandthecityofBelding provided leaveswhen needed.

Although using the landfill as a site was not initially supported — some
peoplecalledita'tatal andtragicnistake"(LP2)— ithastumedouttobea
mutually beneficial relationship for the local project and the landfill owner. The
landfillseestheprojedashaving helpedthemoutbyinvestingthetimeand
energytoorganizeandovelseethedailymanagementofthewindrms. The
landfill alsoseesthisasawayofhelpingtheircustareisoncethebanonyard
wastesgoes intoeffect byprovidingthernwith a placeto bring their leaves (NP 3).
Furthermore the landfill uses much ofthe finished product as top soil in their cell
upping Process-

Theproject benefits byhavinga relatively rernotesite, farawayfrornareas
where newcounty residents might move. Also by havingthelandfill payforthe
necessary equipment the project was able to save money. Moreover, thelandfill
was willing to share the tuner with other sites in the area intereeted in composting.

24
TTielocaISCSagemsunmanzedthelandfillmmeras"adive,coopeiafiveand

willing to go the extra mile."

Thecityoflonia, ontheotherhand,wasnotwilling to "gotheextramile."
ltbadtedoutofitscoopeiafiveamangementwiththeprcjedasasupplierof
Ieavaforacarbonsource. Membelsoftl'recmmitteegavethreereasonsfor
thelackofcooperation. l-‘rrst,thesitewheretheconpcstingwasbeingdonewas
toofarawaytobeeconoricallyfeasibleforttiecity. Thecitymanagerexplained
tl'lattl'lecitytrudtsweiesosmallthattheywouldhavetomake500ninsouttothe
landfillwhichis15milesawayfromthecityandthatwasnoteconomicallyfeasible.
Hetiiedtolaytheblameontheprcjectforplacingthesitessofaraway. Another
comritteenemberblamedtteproblemonfledtypeople'sladtofcooperafion,
"Realisticallytheycan'tgoeverywheleinthecounty, buttheycouldgo7milesout
foranexperiment,buttheywon'ttryit. Iftheyjusttookonetiuckoutitwouldn't
kill them" (LP11).

Anothercomrpnlygivenexplanationfortheladtofdtycooperationdeals
withmoney. 'l'hebottomlineisthateveryonewantedtobepaidfortheirpaitof
theprocess. 'l'hecitywantedtobepaidforhaulingtheleavestotl‘lesiteandthe
famrerswantedtobepaidfortaldngtheleaves(LP's4&5). Finally, afew
cornfitteenemberspoimedoutfliattheieisminwnfiveforfledtytocooperate.
Atthepresenttimetheyhaveaverylmvcostdisposalmethod. NeithertheDhR
northedrain commissionerispreventingthemfromdumpingtheleavesintl'ie
floodplain,sountiltheyaieeitherforcedtocarplyorarepaid toprovidethe

25
leaves why should they incur more cost for waste disposal by participating in the
project? A county commissioner on the planning corrmittee offered this response,
"Both [project and city] should have worked with each other. I don't believe in 'l'll
scratch yourbadr, if you scratch mine.‘ Wren the money dries up what then?
The leaves and manure are not going to dry up."

ANALYSIS

In this section, I will evaluate the accomplishments of the Mlanure
MIanagementDemonstration Projectfromthestandpointofsustainabilityasposited
byReddift, and lwill explainiMiathasnadesomeoftl'leprojed'sgoalsdifiicult
to achieve. finally, in the conclusion, I will outline some of the problems with
transferring the Reddilt model to a Mchigan community.

To review, Reddift (1987) argued forthe inclusion of local knowledge about
the environment and technology in the environmental decision mating procecs.
The inclusion of indigenous practices in the decision making procecs insures that
developrrent plansarecarpatiblewiththelocal community'seconorricand social
systems. Development plans that factor in environmental, economic and social
components fit the definition of sustainability that Keeney (1989) described.

Using Redclift's model I will illuminate some of the strengths and
weaknecses of lonia's approach to collaborative management. The project did
incorporate local knowledge into the decision making procecses. It was through
fliecdlaborafiveefionofacamifleecompnsedoffiwelvepeoplerepresenfing

26
difiererioormmnflyinteiestsfllatananenafivemanurenanagememmeflbdwas
found that would addrees growing local concerns about environmental
contamination from nutrient loading, increased conflict between urban and rural
neighbors regarding odor, the need for the municipalities to find an alternative yard
vastedisposalmefiiodandflieconcernoffanrersfliatanaltemafivemanure
system be economically feasible. In the selection and implementation of a
composting program, alloftheseconcernswereaddressed.

However,theestablishmentofacooperafivesiteatwhidianassociafion
offamrerspodedflleirresourcesnevernatenalizedfiwocomnfleemerbers
shedlighton oneprobablereason. Onemusedthatmaybetherewasno
coopemfimfliaetobeginvwflimndflieofierstatedthatfamersareindependefi
sortsofpeoplewl'loliketodothingstheiromway(LP4&5). Vlhydidn'tthe
planning committee anticipate the lad of cooperation on the part of local
producers? lbelieveitis becausetheyladred adequateproducerrepreseitation
ontheplanning committee.

Theoormitteewascomposedoftwelvemembersonlythreeofvmomwere
producers. Ofthesethreeonewasaformerpresidentofthelocal FannBureau.
Anotiermrsadairyandwasconsidefingthefeasibilityofconposfingonhis
farm Thethirdproduceromsaverylaigeeggfannmidiisalreadyproducing
ahybridcompostdryingthenajorityoftl'eirmanure. Becauseofthesizeofhis
operationanditsabilitytomnitsowncompostingoperafion,hemaynothave
beenverysensitivetotheattitudesandconcemsofsmallerpioduceis. These

27
threenendomotadequatelyrepresemfliediversityoflivestodtproducers in Ionia
County. WoefireycannotrepeserflflediversityoflocalWedgeconoeming
manure management in Ionia county. Therefore, itshould not besurpiisimgthat
the committee misinterpreted the willingnecs of local producers to participate in the
project

Theneedsandconcernsofsvwnefamers,forexanple, arediffeientflom
thoseofturkey,vealorbeeffamers. leewise,theconcemsofsmallfamrersare
differentfrornthoseoflargerproducers. Thereforethecomrritteeshouldhave
indudedamorerepresentativeselectionoflocal producersoratleastawayto
representtheirconcems. Hadtheydcnesctheyrrighthaverecognizedtheladt
cfimerestinacoopelafivesfle,orflieymighthavefoumdanotherwayoffaning
acdlective,sud1ashavingasnallgmupofproducerssharefliecostofbuying
atumerand managing theirown ccrrpost individually.

lonia's local planning cormitteewasweak in two other areas. first, the
membersofthecomnitteewhilerepmtimgavarietyoflocalcomcemsand
interestsdidnotreprecsntalloftl'ieconcemsinthecounty. Theinterestsofnon—
famfingresidems,espedallyfleconcemsofumanpeoplewhorecenflympvedto
the niral comrrunity were not represented. This is unfortunate in a county like
Ionia which is beginning to see an influx of people from Grand Rapids and
'- Lansing. Becauseveryfewloniatownships havezoming ordinancesavarietyof
peoplewith different stakes intheexpansion'oithelivestcdt industryend up living
1 in close proximity to omeamother. It would beespecially important in rural areas

28
experiencing an influxofurban peopletoincludeawideiangeofnon-famimg
perspectives in their planning groups.

finally, the Ionia planning committee did not participate in the
implerrentation of the plan. A key to effective stakeholder procecses is
involvement intheimplementation phaseofdevelopnent plans. Atthetimeofour
interviews, eariy in the summer, planning committee members infomred us that
theyhad notmetforafewmonths. Thelast neetingwasbasicallytofillthemin
onwlathadbeenhappeningwiththeploject.

Thissituation mayhavealisenasaconsequenceoftl'lestateleveltask
force hiring an outsider to serve as project coordinator and making him the liaison
betweenthetaskforceandthelocal committee. Thecoordinator'sclosetiestothe
state level committee were displayed in a number offield days he organized to
cormunicate the initial findings of the project. Present at two of the field days I
aflendedwereUnwersityfaolflyandgraduatestudentsandrepreseitafivesof
MIDA, CES, AES, and SCS. No producers, local or otherwise, were present. Yet,
itwasatthesenaetingsthattheparticipationofthelocal planning conmitteewas
lauded. One committee member said, "we're taken out and paraded around as
needed" (LP 4).

Therearetwo reasonswhyitis unfortunatethatthe planning cormitteehas
taken a passive role during the implementation phase. first, because the
developmentprocecsisdynamic,theneedsmaychange. Activecontinuous
participation by stakeholders would insure that new problems be addressed in a

29
mannertl'latthegroupagreesisthebestforall. Secondly, activelyinvolvingthe

local planning committee throughout the entirety of the project should make it
easiertoconfinuewhatwasstamedwienflieunwersflvathdrawsitspeopleand
itsmoney.

CONCLUSION

Oldmetl'lodsoftopdovwidecisionnaldngor"Enviromental Managerialism"
asReddiftnamesitcannotcieatesustainableplans. Thisisso, becauseeach
locale has certain unique characteristics. Thus, it will have it's own challenges and
concernsabouttheenviromment, local economry, amdcommunityaboutwhich
outsiderswill either be umawareor may choseto ignore in orderto promote their
OIM'I development agendas. Tully sustainable plans must involve local people in
allareasofdecision n'aldngfromtheidentificationoflocalconcamstotl'le
implerrentation of the plan. Redclift called such a model "Collaborative
Management."

The case study of Ionia, while demonstrating the tensions between
outsiders'mamageiialgoalsandimsiders'kmliliedgeandthebenefitsof
incorporating local krowiedge in the planning stage of development processes,
also illuminates some of the complications confronted in the implementation of
collaborative management in our own society. The local population in Ionia has
farnoredMelseimerestsflannightbedaradensficinasetfingsudiasReddifi
outlines. Thus, it is very difficult to organize a planning group in which all of the

30
diverseaiea interestsareadequately represented. The final difficulty in
implementing Redclift's model comes in thefinal stage ofthe Ionia demonstration
project-thetransferoftl'leresultsthroughoutthestate.Thisiswherethestate
leveltaskforcemayfall badtintoconvemtional patternsoftopdowndecisiom
making-MlamagerialismasRedcliftcallsit. ltwouldbeeasiestforthestatetask
forcetopfintgereficpamphletsonthetedinicalaspedsofconposfingamdthe
benefits accrued by individual Ionia producers who implemented this alternative
system Suchanoutcome would ignoreboththeneedsandabilitiesofother
cormunities to idenlify local problems and create theirown alternative strategies.

The technical aspects ofcomposting might be almost identical no matter
whereitisused(LP7),tterecommeioedlemgfliandedthofavwndrow,the
temperature andCO2 levels indicatingtheneedto tumthewindrows, howmuch
andwhatkindofcarbontoadd. Thesettlingsmaynotciiange,btitttlehunan
respoaeMllvaw.Theted1nicalcmponehtsMghtbestandamizedbintheimpad
onpeoplecannotbe.

Therefore, inorderfortl'ledemonstrationprojedtoreachitsmostambitious
goaloiuansiernnngiathasbeenleameduimughculmestatemisinperabve
that the methods through which their project developed be the first technique
recorrmended for state-wide adoption. Only through a processes mat involves
thosemostaffededbydangeandissersitivetothelocalerwironmental,
economic, and social concernscan truly sustainable development take place.

BEJOGRAPHY

BEJOGRAPHY

Allen, Patricia and Carolyn Sachs. 1993. "Sustainable Agriculture in the United
States: Engagements, Silences, and Possibilities for Transfomatiom.
"Food for the Future, New Yorlc John Wley 8. Sons, Inc, p. 139-167.

Blaikie, Piers. 1994. "The Political Ecology of Sustainability." a dralt summary
paper prepared for the Political Ecology Workshop, April.

Bush, John et al. 1992. "Composting Animal Manure and Facility Design to
Address Disposal and Environmental Problems." Mlanure Demonstration
Grant Proposal submitted to the Manure Management Demonstration

Connor, Larry et al. 1991. Utilizing Mchigan's Animal Manure Resources. The
Michigan Manure Management Task Force, September, p. 1-14.

Conway, G. 1985. "Agro-ecosystem analysis." Agricultural Administration. 20,
31-55.
Dixon, John and Louise Fallon. 1989. "The Concept of Sustainability Origins,

Extensions, and Usefulness for Policy." Society and Natural Resources
v. 2, pp. 73-84.

FD. 1994. personal interview. February.

Gale, Richard and Sheila Cordray. 1994. "Mlaking Sense of Sustainability."
Rural Sociology. 59 (2) pp. 311 -332.

HouseBill40543spassed bytheI-louseSecondanalysisAplil7,1981.

Huron, Sanilac and Tuscola Cooperating Agencies and Projects. 1992. "Thmb
Manure Management Derronstration Project." grant proposal submitted
to the Mlanure Management Demonstration Project.

Ionia County Manure Management Planning Committee. 1992. "

. _ . Composting
Ammal Manure to Address Disposal and Envrronm'ental Problems."
Manure Demonstration Grant Pre-Propcsal.

31

32

Keeney, Dennis. 1989. ”Toward a Sustainable Agriculture: Need for clarification
of concepts and terrrinology." American Joumal ofAltematr’we
Agiculture. v.4: 3&4 p. 101-105.

Lockeietz, Willem 1991. "Defining a sustainable future: basic issues in
agriculture." in G. Johnson and J. Bonnen (eds), Social Science
Agricultural Agendas and Strategies (Part III). East Lnasing, Ml:
Mchigan State University Press.

Loudon, Ted L and Robert D. von Bernuth. 1993. "Animal Manure
Strategies for Mchigan." Research Proposal to the USDA Cooperative
State Research Service.

Mchigan Agriculture Commission (MIAC). 1992. "Generally Accepted
Agricultural and Management Practices for Mlanure Management and
Utilization."

Michigan Department of Agriculture (MBA). 1992. "Right to Famn
Environmental Complaint Response Program"

Ottawa Soil and Water Conservation District. 1992. "Animal Mlanure Use
Solutions For Ottawa County." grant proposal submitted to the Mlamure

Mlamagement Demonstration Project.
Planning 8 Zoning Center. 1994. "Ionia County Plan for Planning." Draft.
Redclift, Michael. 1987. Sustainable Development. London: Methuen & Co.

Rynk, Robert. 1987. "Almost Mainstream? -A Progress Report on Dairy
Mlanure Composting." Pre-edited Draft developed for the Third
International Dairy Housing Conference, Sponsor. American Society of
Agricultural Engineers.

Rynk, Robert, editor. 1992. Orr-Famn CompostingHandboolc Ithaca, NY:
Northeast Regional Agricultural Enginwiing Service.

"Illllllllllllllllllllllll