Campbell, Julie H. (author), Henderson, Jason J. (author), Wallace, Victoria H. (author), and University of Georgia
University of Connecticut
Department of Extension, University of Connecticut
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2018-08
Published:
United States: American Society for Horticultural Science
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 11 Document Number: D10327
7 pages., Via online journal., This study examined how different presentation formats affected knowledge gain among school grounds managers. Results indicate large-group participants (presentation to ≈50 participants at a turfgrass field day) had greater knowledge retention than small-group participants (presentation to 6–10 participants at an interactive workshop). Small-group attendees had more flexibility to discuss issues that affected them directly and may have focused on those issues instead of the targeted information. Large-group meetings were more ridged in format and attendees were less able to deviate from the main subject matter being presented. However, the value of the small-group meeting should not be discounted, especially when athletic field grounds managers and staff require information specific to their situation. When disseminating more general information, the large-group meeting format is a better means of delivery.
10 pages., Via online journal., Pollinating insects are integral to the health of all terrestrial ecosystems and agriculture worldwide. Urbanization can greatly reduce nutritional resources and habitat for pollinators. However, these losses can be mitigated through targeted landscape practices, such as planting nectar- and pollen-rich plants and managing pollinator habitat in urban areas, especially home landscapes. As homeowners attempt to conserve pollinators through horticultural practices, they often seek the advice and guidance of horticulture retail employees. The knowledge horticulture employees have about pollinators and the recommendations they provide to customers is largely unknown. A nationwide survey was developed and distributed with the objectives to 1) assess employee knowledge about pollinators and pollination biology, 2) discover what plant and management recommendations employees were giving customers pertaining to pollinator conservation, and 3) determine where to focus possible education and outreach, as well as which topics to focus educational programs on. Our findings suggest, among our respondents, that overall knowledge was adequate, with a mean score (±sd) being 8.37 (±3.23) of a possible range of 0–14 points. Uncertified and part-time employees were identified as having significantly lower scores. The subject of plant selection was found to have the largest gap in knowledge, with a mean score of 1.82 (±0.62) of a possible three points. We identified several opportunities for educational outreach, aimed at improving employee and customer knowledge on this important subject.
9 pages., Via online journal., Certain pesticides are coming under scrutiny because of their impact on pollinator insects. Although most consumers express willingness to aid pollinators, the reasons for consumers’ preferences or barriers to purchasing pollinator-friendly plants and the types of pollinators’ that consumers are trying to protect are less understood. Using an online survey of 1200 Connecticut (CT) consumers, of which 841 had home landscapes, we find that 46% of consumers with home landscapes purchased pollinator-friendly plants to attract pollinators to their landscape. Consistent with past research that focused on consumers’ preferences for pollinator-friendly plants, the data also reveal that some consumers are willing to pay premiums for plants that contribute to pollinator’s health. However, only 17% stated that attracting pollinators was their primary motivation; a finding that suggests labeling alone will likely not motivate consumers to purchase plants. The major barriers to purchasing pollinator-friendly plants included lack of labeling (cited by 28%), followed by high price (28%). Consumers purchasing pollinator-friendly plants were trying to attract butterflies (Lepidoptera) (78%), bees (Apidae) (59%), hummingbirds (Trochilidae) (59%), and other birds (41%). We also find that demographics and purchasing behavior affect barriers and types of pollinators desired. Simply labeling plants has the potential to increase purchasing, but increasing price could be detrimental as many consumers feel pollinator-friendly plants are highly priced. Implications for ornamental horticulture stakeholders are discussed.
