Butler, James R.A. (author), Darbas, Toni (author), Addison, Jane (author), Bohensky, Erin L. (author), Carter, Lucy (author), Cosijn, Michaela (author), Maru, Yiheyis T. (author), Stone-Jovicich, Samantha (author), Williams, Liana J. (author), and Rodriguez, Luis C. (author)
Format:
Book chapter
Publication Date:
2017
Published:
International: CSIRO Publishing, Clayton South, Victoria, Australia
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 18 Document Number: D10513
Notes:
217 pages., Pages 109-129 in Heinz Schandl and Lain Walker (eds.), Social science and sustainability. CSIRO Publishing, Clayton South, Victoria,Australia. 2017. 217 pages.
10 pages., Due to the Library's response to COVID-19, this document is currently only available through online access. If no link is provided in this record, the ACDC will make this document accessible through our collection once we are able to return to our office., This article explores some issues that have been important in the climate change mitigation debate in Australia. Findings suggest that opinion leaders believe the policy has been slow to progress due to media promotion of the uncertainty associated with climate change science, the weakness of leadership, and the political cost of unpalatable policy.
11 pages., Online via journal by open access., Outlined a transdisciplinary research approach to issues of justice and equity in a real-life social conflict concerning the allocation of water for irrigation farming.
Young, Ian (author), Waddell, Lisa (author), Harding, Shannon (author), Greig, Judy (author), Mascarenhas, Mariola (author), Sivaramalingam, Bhairavi (author), Pham, Mai (author), and Papadopoulos, Andrew (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2015
Published:
International
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 153 Document Number: D06782
2 pages., Briefly describes efforts of AgForce, "the only farm group in Australia undertaking a sustained rural image campaign to engage and communicate with the urban population about how and where food and fibre is produced."
17 pages, via online journal, The greatest challenge now facing agricultural science is not how to increase production overall but how to enable resource-poor farmers to produce more.
The transfer-of-technology (TOT) model of agricultural research is part of the normal professionalism of agricultural scientists. In this model, scientists largely determine research priorities, develop technologies in controlled conditions, and then hand them over to agricultural extension to transfer to farmers. Although strong structures and incentives sustain this normal professionalism, many now recognise the challenge of its bad fit with the needs and conditions of hundreds of millions of resource-poor farm (RPF) families. In response to this problem, the TOT model has been adapted and extended through multi-disciplinary farming systems research (FSR) and on-farm trials. These responses retain power in the hands of scientists. Information is obtained from farmers and processed and analysed in order to identify what might be good for them. A missing element is methods to encourage and enable resource-poor farmers themselves to meet and work out what they need and want.
10 pages., Researchers investigated empowerment in the context of two strategies, Integrated Weed Management and Integrated Pest Management. Findings suggested: "With the rise of chemical resistance, the agricultural industry has placed considerable emphasis on the need to accelerate and achieve farmer adoption if IWM and IPM, but our evidence suggests that greater emphasis should be given to understanding the socio-cultural factors that affect farmer decision making. Farmer empowerment emerged as a core concept from the data."
13 pages., Via online journal., Agricultural research in developing countries often involves collaboration between dispersed multicultural teams of scientists from developed and developing countries. The teams use information and computing technologies (ICTs) to communicate between team members, who originate from different cultures using different languages. This paper investigates the usability and utility of a range of ICTs used for communication between team members from different cultures. The research used an intercultural heuristic evaluation tool, or I‐CHET, to evaluate nine ICTs used by Australian and Lao scientists for team communication. The evaluation showed that asynchronous ICTs (e.g., e‐mail) were preferred by non‐native English speakers, while synchronous media (e.g., audio conferencing, instant messaging, Skype) presented considerable problems between team members from different cultures. Most ICTs evaluated in the study demonstrated little consideration for non‐native English speakers and for inexperienced ICTs users. However, all evaluated ICTs demonstrated the ability to transmit information and encourage communication between information users in scientific collaborations. The I‐CHET assessment tool highlights the ongoing need for a “toolbox” of communication ICTs for research collaborations that can be adapted to suit the cultural and professional needs of multinational teams, worldwide.
