12 pages, Knowledge brokers are often portrayed as neutral intermediaries that act as a necessary conduit between the spheres of science and policy. Conceived largely as a task in packaging, brokers are expected to link knowledge producers and users and objectively translate science into policy-useable knowledge. The research presented in this paper shows how brokering can be far more active and precarious. We present findings from semi-structured interviews with practitioners working with community-based groups involved in collaborative water planning in New Zealand’s South Island region of Canterbury. Working in a highly conflicted situation, our brokers had to navigate different knowledges and epistemic practices, highly divergent values and grapple with uncertainties to deliver recommendations for regional authorities to set water quality and quantity limits. Conceiving science and policy as interlinked, mutually constitutive and co-produced at multiple levels, rather than as separate domains, shows how the brokers of this study were not only bridging or blurring science policy boundaries to integrate and translate knowledges. They were also building boundaries between science and policy to foster credibility and legitimacy for themselves as scientists and the knowledge they were brokering. This research identifies further under-explored aspects of brokering expertise, namely, the multiple dimensions of brokering, transdisciplinary skills and expertise, ‘absorptive’ uncertainty management and knowledge translation practices.
9 pages, This study assessed crop farmers’ willingness to pay for AESs and identified factors influencing their willingness to pay for AESs. Data were collected from 292 randomly selected crop farmers’ households between December 2017 and February 2018 using a questionnaire through face-to-face interviews. Data were analyzed using frequency counts, percentages and Tobit regression model. The study found that 92% of the respondents are willing to pay for AESs. It was also found that farmer’s age, education attainment, farming experience, distance from farm to the nearest important road, income (both farm and nonfarm) and attitude towards AESs are significant determinants of farmers willingness to pay for AESs. The study recommends that these variables be given proper policy consideration by the government and other stakeholders in the design and the implementation of a workable fashion of privatizing extension services for the expected impact of improving extension services and farmers’ productivity hence improved quality of life.