Manyweathers, Jennifer (author), Hernández-Jover, Marta (author), Hayes, Lynne (author), Loechel, Barton (author), Kelly, Jennifer (author), Felton, Simone (author), El Hassan, Marwan (author), Woodgate, Rob (author), and Maru, Yiheyis (author)
Format:
Journal Article
Publication Date:
2020-06-18
Published:
Italy: Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 205 Document Number: D12741
8pgs, A transdisciplinary pilot study with Australia's livestock industries is bringing multiple stakeholders together as equal partners, to examine the complex problems around animal disease management. These problems include disease surveillance and on-farm biosecurity practices. The pilot groups are established in industries susceptible to foot and mouth disease, namely dairy and beef cattle, pork, sheep and goats. The Agricultural Innovation Systems framework is being evaluated to determine its effectiveness as a tool to improve partnerships between stakeholders. These stakeholders include livestock producers (farmers), private and government veterinarians, local council representatives, and industry personal including from saleyards and abattoirs. Stimulation of innovative solutions to issues arising from conflicting priorities and limited resources around animal disease management are also expected. Using a participatory communication approach, the impact of the pilot on trust and relationships is being evaluated. The sustainability of the Agricultural Innovation Systems approach to address complex issues around animal health management is also being assessed. The aim of the study is to strengthen Australia's preparedness for an emergency animal disease outbreak, such as Foot and Mouth Disease.
Godfrey, D. Matthew (author), Feng, Patrick (author), and Department of Marketing, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
Department of Communication, Media and Film, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2017
Published:
USA: Emerald Publishing
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D08305
Amelung, Dorothee (author), Fischer, Helen (author), Kruse, Lenelis (author), Sauerborn, Rainer (author), and Department of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
Climate Change and Health Working Group, Institue of Public Health, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
Claremont Graduate University, USA
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2016-08-31
Published:
Switzerland: Frontiers Media
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 164 Document Number: D08300
18pgs, Building a strong and trustworthy communication network to report unusual signs of disease will facilitate Australia’s response to a foot and mouth disease (FMD) outbreak. In a four-year study, the FMD Ready Farmer-led surveillance project adopted the Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS) framework, modelling transformation of how knowledge is co-created, valued, and communicated. The FMD Ready project has highlighted the need for multiple stakeholders’ voices to be heard, and the importance of regulatory bodies to listen. Relationships take time and need to be valued as a necessary tool in a participatory, innovative approach to animal health and disease management.
24 pages., Open access and online via ScienceDirect., The suggested model involves interactions and integration among knowledge (K), social practices (P), and values (V). Authors contemplated bottom-up relationships among scientists, environmental managers, science journalists, and other citizens operating within a context of top-down institutional constraints. They emphasized values and social practices, as well as knowledge, in addressing institutional change.
24 pages., via online journal., The present study investigated the effects of communication styles, source expertise, and audiences’ preexisting attitudes in the contexts of the debate regarding genetically modified organisms. A between-subject experiment (N = 416) was conducted manipulating communication styles (aggressive vs. polite) and the expertise of the communicator (scientist vs. nonscientist) in blog articles. The results showed significant effects of communicator expertise and individuals’ preexisting attitudes on writer likability and message quality, depending on the communication style used. Expectancy violation was found as a significant mediator that explains the differences. These findings provided a plausible explanation for the way in which communication styles work in science communication contexts and offered practical implications for science communicators to communicate more strategically.
