7 pages, via online journal, Despite large investments in research to modernize African agriculture, enabling it to fulfil its potential, traditional agriculture still predominates. To many, the lack of adoption of knowledge generated through agricultural research is due either to the inexplicable functioning of the farmer's decision-making process or to a set of issues so complex that it is not clear how they could ever be overcome. This paper reviews a project in Sub-Saharan Africa in which bean pest management became a tool through which communities were empowered to address a wide range of development issues. This paper suggests that what needs to be altered substantially is the way scientists view and interact with the poor.
13 pages., Via online journal., Based on research-to-policy narratives provided by UC Cooperative Extension (UCCE) academics, we argue that current, effective Cooperative Extension (Extension) practices support a broader, more convincing account of Extension's public value than its leaders often articulate. This proposed account incorporates the familiar Extension narrative in which technical expertise and objectivity are emphasized. It also incorporates the insight, derived from our data, that Extension can achieve its greatest relevance in policy circles when it weaves together its ability to provide trustworthy technical knowledge with its capacity to influence policy dialogue, debate and practice across multiple settings and over the long term. In a policy world often marked by short-term thinking and polarization, Extension's ability to foster deliberative, context-sensitive and future-oriented policymaking is a critical contribution to society. Interview data reveals three approaches to effective policy-oriented relationship building: community-government partnership building; stakeholder-oriented experimental research; and community empowerment. Understanding these approaches can help reframe the story that we in the Extension system tell ourselves and the public about the public value we create.
21 pages., via online journal., Scholars are divided over whether communicating to the public the existence
of scientific consensus on an issue influences public acceptance of the
conclusions represented by that consensus. Here, we examine the
influence of four messages on perception and acceptance of the scientific
consensus on the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs): two
messages supporting the idea that there is a consensus that GMOs are safe
for human consumption and two questioning that such a consensus exists.
We found that although participants concluded that the pro-consensus
messages made stronger arguments and were likely to be more
representative of the scientific community’s attitudes, those messages did
not abate participants’ concern about GMOs. In fact, people’s premanipulation attitudes toward GMOs were the strongest predictor of of our outcome variables (i.e. perceived argument strength, post-message GMO
concern, perception of what percent of scientists agree). Thus, the results
of this study do not support the hypothesis that consensus messaging
changes the public’s hearts and minds, and provide more support, instead,
for the strong role of motivated reasoning.
18 pages., Via online journal., This research reports on rural people’s beliefs and understandings of climate change in the Saurastra/
Kutch region of Western India. Results suggest that although most rural respondents have not heard about
the scientific concept of climate change, they have detected changes in the climate. They appear to hold
divergent understandings about climate change and have different priorities for causes and solutions. Many
respondents appear to base their understandings of climate change upon a mix of ideas drawn from various
sources and rely on different kinds of reasoning in relation to both causes of and solutions to climate change
to those used by scientists. Environmental conditions were found to influence individuals’ understanding
of climate change, while demographic factors were not. The results suggest a need to learn more about
people’s conceptual models and understandings of climate change and a need to include local climate
research in communication efforts.
28 pages, via online journal, While uncertainty is central to science, many fear negative effects of communicating scientific uncertainties to the public, though research results about such effects are inconsistent. Therefore, we test the effects of four distinct uncertainty frame types (deficient, technical, scientific, consensus) on three outcomes (belief, credibility, behavioral intentions) across three science issues (climate change, GMO food labeling, machinery hazards) with an experiment using a national sample (N = 2,247) approximating U.S. census levels of age, education, and gender. We find portraying scientific findings using uncertainty frames usually does not have significant effects, with an occasional exception being small negative effects of consensus uncertainty.
