Garrett M. Steede (author), Courtney Meyers (author), Nan Li (author), Erica Irlbeck (author), Sherice Gearhart (author), and Texas Tech University; University of Minnesota - Twin Cities
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2018
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 149 Document Number: D10103
Article 4; pgs. 1-16, On January 1, 2017, the final rule of the Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) was put into place requiring
antibiotics approved for both humans and animals to be discontinued for growth promotion. This change was
brought on by the role growth promoters in livestock production play in the development of antibiotic
resistance. Antibiotic resistance increases the costs associated with human health care by increasing the length
of stays in the hospital and requiring more intensive medical care for patients. The purpose of this study was to
explore sentiment and characteristics of social media content and the characteristics of the key influencers
whose opinions had the greatest amount of reach on social media in regard to antibiotic use in livestock and
antibiotic resistance. Nuvi, a social media monitoring program, provided sentiment for each tweet and coded
64.8% of the content (n = 129) as negative compared to 38.2% (n = 76) humans coded as negative. The
contrast between human coders and Nuvi indicates there could be discrepancies between how Nuvi codes
content and the way a human might interpret the content. No key influencer discussed antibiotic use in
livestock positively. Findings suggest agricultural communicators should not rely completely on the output
from sentiment analysis programs to evaluate how the public discusses issues related to agriculture,
particularly controversial issues. Further, agricultural communications practitioners should prioritize
monitoring the content shared by key influencers in an effort to better understand the content being shared by
the most influential users. Recommendations for future research are provided.
Giacchè, Giulia (author) and Silva, Wânia Rezende (author)
Format:
Proceedings
Publication Date:
2016
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D08819
Notes:
Pages 431-452 in Rob Roggema (ed.), Agriculture in an urbanizing society volume one: proceedings of the sixth AESOP conference on sustainable food planning. United Kingdom: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 549 pages.
14 pages., Food ecologies and economies are vital to the survival of communities, non-human species, and our planet. While environmental communication scholars have legitimated food as a topic of inquiry, the entangled ecological, cultural, economic, racial, colonial, and alimentary relations that sustain food systems demand greater attention. In this essay, we review literature within and beyond environmental communication, charting the landscape of critical food work in our field. We then illustrate how environmental justice commitments can invigorate interdisciplinary food systems-focused communication scholarship articulating issues of, and critical responses to, injustice and inequity across the food chain. We stake an agenda for food systems communication by mapping three orientations—food system reform, justice, and sovereignty—that can assist in our critical engagements with and interventions into the food system. Ultimately, we entreat environmental communication scholars to attend to the bends, textures, and confluences of these orientations so that we may deepen our future food-related inquiries.
Grichting, Anna (author), Awwaad, Reem (author), Ball, Luzita (author), and Tantillo, Paige (author)
Format:
Proceedings
Publication Date:
2016
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D08816
Notes:
Pages 85-109 in Rob Roggema (ed.), Agriculture in an urbanizing society volume one: proceedings of the sixth AESOP conference on sustainable food planning. United Kingdom: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 549 pages.
Hanjra, Munir A. (author), Noble, Andrew (author), Langan, Simon (author), and Lautze, Jonathan (author)
Format:
Book chapter
Publication Date:
2017
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D08785
Notes:
Pages 15-40 in Gordon, Iain J. Prins, Herbert H.T. Squire, Geoff R. (eds.), Food production and nature conservation: conflicts and solutions. United Kingdom: Routledge, London. 348 pages.
Harsh, Jessica (author), Lamm, Alexa (author), Telg, Ricky (author), and Meyers, Courtney (author)
Format:
Paper abstract
Publication Date:
2018-02
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 199 Document Number: D10019
Notes:
Abstract of paper presented at the National Agricultural Communications Symposium, Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (SAAS) Agricultural Communications Section, Jacksonville, Florida, February 4-5, 2018.
12 pages, Food waste and food insecurity are two concurrent major public health issues. To address them, gleaning programs can reduce waste and enhance food security by diverting produce to food pantries. To understand the experiences of farmers and gleaning programs, interviews were completed with 12 farmers who had participated in a gleaning program and 16 farmers who had not donated produce through a gleaning program within the Greater Kansas City metro area. For farmers who had participated in the gleaning program, the ease of donating and tax incentives were primary benefits. Inadequate experience and inefficient volunteers were cited as challenges. Farmers without experience with gleaning programs cited safety and liability issues as concerns. Because farmers communicate frequently with other farmers, food rescue organizations should consider enlisting their support. Communities and government agencies should provide financial support to improve the resources and infrastructure of gleaning organizations to improve farmer-gleaner relationships.
