Agriculture and Economic Development Analysis Division (author)
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
2013
Published:
Ghana: Food and Agriculture Oranization of the United Nations
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 204 Document Number: D12449
Journal Title Details:
2013 Report
Notes:
173 pages., The synthesis report by FAO’s Monitoring African Food and Agricultural Policies (MAFAP) team, is the first ever attempt to systematically analyze agriculture and food security policies in several African countries, using common methodology over years. The report found that in the period between 2005 and 2010, the policy environment and performance of domestic markets depressed producer prices in the ten African countries analyzed, though the trend is improving. Most governments resorted to m arket and trade policies to protect consumers and keep food prices down in the reference period whilst budgetary transfers, were mainly been used to support producers. The report concludes that producer prices would improve significantly if inefficiencies in domestic value chains were eliminated through better targeted policies. These inefficiencies however seem to be increasing in all ten countries surveyed. The current MAFAP partner countries are: Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Mala wi, Mali, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda.
Alison, Kathleen I. (author), Salcedo, R.N. (author), and Scherer, C.W. (author)
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
1974
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 7 Document Number: B00775
Notes:
AgComm Teaching, Urbana, Illinois: Office of Agricultural Communications, College of Agriculture, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 17pp. (Agricultural Communications Research Report 28).
Bruce, Gordana (author), Critchley, Christine (author), Dempsey, Deborah (author), Gilding, Michael (author), Hardie, Elizabeth (author), Walshe, Jarrod (author), and Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
2007
Published:
Australia
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 164 Document Number: C27386
Cook G (author), Pieri E (author), Robbins P T (author), and Economic and Social Research Council, United Kingdom
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
2004
Published:
UK: University of Reading
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 141 Document Number: C21642
Notes:
13 pages, The research aims to analyse the language and discourse of the debate over GM crops and food during February-July 2003. This period is expected by all sides to be one of renewed controversy and interest in the UK, with a government initiated national debate, discussion of the GM crop field trial results, and reconsideration of the current moratorium on commercial cultivation. Although it is impossible to predict either the exact course or duration of the debate, it is certain to provide a wealth of material for research into the impact of stakeholders' communication strategies upon public trust and understanding. Recently, the GM debate has generated a great deal of research and publication. The proposed project, however, is distinctive for its attention to the language and discourse of the debate, and for its combination of linguistic and sociological methodology. The GM debate brings together scientific, ethical, political and social concerns. Each perspective has its own discourse, and this in itself can be a source of misunderstanding and disagreement. The research will focus less upon the content of the debate, as other research has done, and more upon the forms in which it is expressed, as well as ways in which it is framed by its actors. It will explore how styles of argument, metaphors and analogies, phrases and single words can change in meaning and effect when they cross discoursal boundaries. As such, it will make a unique contribution to understanding of the public debate, and be of value and relevance to all stakeholders, interested academics, and society in general. More generally it will provide insights into the communication of controversial new technology and the responses of both public, media, and policy makers. For this purpose, the project will collect, analyse and relate three datasets. The first will be an electronically stored corpus of newspaper articles and public statements by major stakeholders (such as NGOs, government, and biotechnology companies). This first datatset can be automatically analysed using current corpus linguistic software to reveal frequent word choices and combinations. The second dataset will be transcripts of interviews with representatives of major stakeholder organisations about the factors governing their choices of language and strategies of argumentation. This second dataset will be coded using software for qualitative analysis, to reveal recurrent themes and opinions. The third dataset will be transcriptions of six focus groups, meeting on two occasions each, in which participants react to the language choices and communicative styles of selected extracts from dataset one. Focus groups have been chosen for the depth which they allow in the exploration of views and opinions among targeted groups with a particular relation to the topic. In our research each group identity will relate to one area of the debate, as follows: parents of young children (diet and health); charity volunteers (ethical concerns); students in higher education (long term effects); birdwatchers (biodiversity); farmers (consequences for agriculture); temporary UK residents from poor countries (effect on crop nutrition and yield). The intention is not to provide a survey of opinion, of which many already exist, nor to duplicate the existing focus-group literature on public responses to GM, but to provide new evidence of the discoursal sources of conflict and mistrust. This third dataset will also be coded for themes and arguments. This research will elucidate the actual (rather than presumed) effect of styles of argument on public perceptions and trust, thus complimenting and deepening existing understanding.
Fisher, Ann (author) and Chitose, Atsushi (author)
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
1992
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 113 Document Number: C11066
Notes:
University Park, PA : Pennsylvania State University. Baseline survey of professionals in the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 154 Document Number: C24967
Notes:
Prepared by COI Communications, London, on behalf of Food Standards Agency., Summary of findings filed in print form. Full report (67 pages) available online.
Freeman, Chester B. (author), Ward, William B. (author), Russell, Charles C. (author), and Spencer, John F. (author)
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
1963-11
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 192 Document Number: D03135
Notes:
Communication Research Bulletin 4, Department of Extension Teaching and Information, Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Ithaca. 32 pages., Workers at a National Cash Register plant in Ithaca, New York, express need for information about subjects in which the Colleges of Agriculture and Home Economics are working.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 133 Document Number: D11399
Notes:
9 pages., Online via website., Results of a national survey among U.S. adults suggest that"divides in public opinion over food are encapsulated by how people assess the health effects of two kinds of food: organic and genetically modified (GM) foods. Americans' beliefs about food connect with their personal concerns about the role of food choices in their long term health and well-being."
