Fielke, Simona (author), Taylor, Brucea (author), Coggan, Antheaa (author), Jakku, Emma (author), Davis, Aaron M. (author), Thorburn, Peter J. (author), Webster, Anthony J. (author), and Smart, James C.R. (author)
Format:
Journal Article
Publication Date:
2022-04-01
Published:
Netherlands: Elsevier
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 206 Document Number: D12813
12pgs, We report on qualitative social research conducted with stakeholders in a local agricultural knowledge and advice network associated with a collaborative water quality monitoring project. These farmers, advisors and researchers allude to existing social dynamics, technological developments, and (more general) social evolution which is analysed against a novel analytical framework. This framework considers notions of power, social capital, and trust as related and dynamic, forming the basis of our contribution to knowledge. We then probe the data to understand perceived impacts of the collaborative project and social interaction associated with this research project, which involved cutting edge automated and frequent water quality monitoring that allowed for near real-time access to data visualisation displayed via a bespoke mobile or web ‘app’ (1622WQ). Our findings indicate that a multi-faceted approach to assessing and intervening based on consideration of multiple social dimensions holds promise in terms of creating conditions that allow for individual and group learning to encourage changes in thinking required to result in improved land management practice.
14 pages, As agricultural conservation priorities evolve to address new complex social-ecological problems and emerging social priorities, new conservation incentive program participation and success can be enhanced by incorporating local stakeholder preferences into program design. Our research explores how farmers incorporate ecosystem services into management decisions, their willingness to participate in payment for ecosystem services programs, and factors beyond compensation level that would influence participation. We conducted three focus groups with 24 participants between January of 2019 and May of 2019 in Vermont. Our study revealed that a strong, intrinsic stewardship ethic motivates farmers to enhance ecosystem service provisioning from their farms, though financial pressures often limit decision-making. These results suggest that programs with sufficient levels of payment may attract participation, at least among some types of farmers, to enhance ecosystem services from farms in Vermont. However, farmers may be deterred from participating by perceived unfairness and distrust of the government based on previous experiences with regulations and conservation incentive structures. Farmers also expressed distrust of information about ecosystem services supply that conflicts with their perceptions of agroecosystem functioning, unless delivered by trusted individuals from the extension system. The delivery of context-specific information on how management changes impact ecosystem service performance from trusted sources could enhance farmers’ decisions, and would aptly complement payments. Additionally, farmers expressed a desire to see a program that both achieves additionality and rewards farms who have been stewards, goals that are potentially at odds. Our findings offer important insights for policy makers and program administrators who need to understand factors that will influence farmers’ willingness to participate in payment for ecosystem service programs and other conservation practice adoption initiatives, in Vermont and elsewhere.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 205 Document Number: D12621
Journal Title Details:
Online
Notes:
3 pgs, A new mapping tool shows where households have taken advantage of a federal stimulus program that defrays some of the cost of broadband for lower-income Americans.The tool, which was created through a partnership between Rural LISC and the nonpartisan nonprofit Heartland Forward, was designed to help target families that may qualify for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) but who aren’t participating.
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.
5 pages, The current research was planned and conducted at Institute of Agricultural Extension, Education
and Rural Development, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan during the year 2019-20
and restricted to district Gujranwala with respect to potato crop. The main objective of this study
was to compare the extension services provided by the public and private sector along with
different teaching methodologies adopted by them. However, 36 respondents from each tehsil
of district Gujranwala were selected through convenient sampling technique. Thereby, getting a
sample size of 144 for the purpose of data collection for which interviews were conducted. Data
were analyzed through SPSS. Results were explained through weighted score and mean values
of all variables. According to results it was found that both sectors were giving useful knowledge
to farmers with different teaching methods. It was also concluded that farmers had desire to take
information from public sector but they have to go to private sector for products. Furthermore, it
was also concluded that performance of public sector was better than private sector.
13 pages, An increasing number of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the German organic agri-food sector involves citizens through different community financing models. While such models provide alternative funding sources as well as marketing opportunities to SMEs, they allow private investors to combine their financial and ethical concerns by directly supporting the development of a more sustainable food system. Due to the low level of financial intermediation, community financing is characterized by close relations between investors and investees. Against this background, we apply the proximity concept from economic geography to explore spatial and relational aspects of community financing in the German organic agri-food sector. Based on a qualitative multiple case study approach, we find that the relevance of proximity is twofold. While different forms of proximity between SMEs and their potential investors are key success factors, proximity is also considered as one desired outcome of community financing. Furthermore, our results reveal that the extent to which SMEs rely on particular proximity dimensions distinguishes two different approaches to community financing.
15 pgs, Biotechnology might contribute to solving food safety and security challenges. However, gene technology has been under public scrutiny, linked to the framing of the media and public discourse. The study aims to investigate people’s perceptions and acceptance of food biotechnology with focus on transgenic genetic modification versus genome editing. An online experiment was conducted with participants from the United Kingdom (n = 490) and Switzerland (n = 505). The participants were presented with the topic of food biotechnology and more specifically with experimentally varied vignettes on transgenic and genetic modification and genome editing (scientific uncertainty: high vs. low, media format: journalistic vs. user-generated blog). The results suggest that participants from both countries express higher levels of acceptance for genome editing compared to transgenic genetic modification. The general and personal acceptance of these technologies depend largely on whether the participants believe the application is beneficial, how they perceive scientific uncertainty, and the country they reside in. Our findings suggest that future communication about gene technology should focus more on discussing trade-offs between using an agricultural technologies and tangible and relevant benefits, instead of a unidimensional focus on risk and safety.
