9 pages., Via online journal., This paper looks at how knowledge has been communicated within a multi-layered water governance structure in order to manage non-point source (NPS) pollution in South Korea. Since 28,300 ha of wetlands were reclaimed in Saemangeum, on the western side of the country, in 2006, the artificial lake created has suffered from chronic pollution. For the purposes of integrated water management, a water governance structure was formed linking organisations ranging from local to national scales. Despite institutional efforts to implement integrated water management and a governance approach, knowledge of NPS pollution and its management was produced and communicated among certain stakeholders only, such as policy and technical experts. In-depth interview and archival analysis of this research attempt to explain why and how the loss of knowledge communication occurred in this context. The first result of this research illustrates that, while knowledge communication has been smooth at the national and provincial layers, it has not taken place efficiently through to the local layer. When it comes to local farmers and governmental organisations and experts in particular, knowledge nodes have not functioned. Second, the research suggests that non-communication of knowledge has been mobilised as a professional strategy. Actors at the local layer have prioritized their professional interests and intentionally avoided knowledge communication with other department or ministries. Local and community actors have chosen not to provide farmers information. We conclude by discussing policy implications for knowledge communication and inclusive water governance.
9 pages., Via online journal., Lack of trust is thought to be one of the most significant barriers to the consumption of organic foods, which is an important dimension of sustainable behaviour. Building trust in organic foods is the central objective of this paper. Based on information processing models focusing on what message to transmit and how, and on the premise that to improve trust, two different dimensions (functionality and authenticity) must be managed simultaneously, this paper analyzes the comparative effectiveness of different combinations of message arguments, forms of appeal and sources on consumer trust. To this end, an experiment was designed with a total of 800 participants, in which 36 different treatments were tested. The results show strong interactions between the three variables considered and suggest that the most effective combinations for building trust are: the health argument put across by an expert, the authenticity argument transmitted by a producers’ union, the elitist argument made by an expert and lastly, the social argument transmitted by a public authority, using an emotional form of appeal in all four cases. These results serve to complete the previous literature on the subject, in which communication activities are recommended but the questions of what to say, how to say it and who should say it are not specifically addressed.
