6 pages., (Special Issue from the 17th International Nitrogen Workshop), Via online Journal, Substantial improvements of agricultural systems are necessary to meet the future requirements of humanity.
However, current agricultural knowledge and information systems are generally not well suited to meet the
necessary improvements in productivity and sustainability. For more effective application of research output,
research producers and research consumers should not be considered as separate individuals in the knowledge
chain but as collaborating partners creating synergy. The current paper investigates the relationships between
scientists and stakeholders and identifies approaches to increase the effectiveness of their communication.
On-farm research has proven to be an effective means of improving exploitation of research output at farm level
because it connects all relevant partners in the process. Furthermore, pilot farms can act as an effective platform
for communication and dissemination. Regional networks of pilot farms should be established and connected
across regions
20 pgs., Several U.S. federal government agencies collect and disseminate scientific data on a national scale to provide insights for agricultural trade, research, consumer health, and policy. Occasionally, such data have potential to provide insights to advance conversations and actions around critical and controversial issues in the broad agricultural system. Such government studies provide evidence for others to discuss, further interpret, and act upon, but to do so, they must be communicated well. When the research intersects with contentious socio-political issues, successful communication not only depends on tactics, but as this study illuminates, it also depends on relationship quality between research producers, study participants, and end-users. USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) conducted first-of-its kind national studies on cattle and swine producers’ use of antimicrobials. The use of antimicrobials in animal agriculture is considered a critical and controversial issue pertaining to antimicrobial resistance. In recognition of the anticipated wide-ranging interests in these studies, APHIS sought to understand stakeholders’ perceptions and experiences of the federal government research process and products with aim of improving their science communication and relations. This study reports on findings from in-depth interviews with 14 stakeholders involved in the antimicrobial use studies to make recommendations for improving communication and relations between the agency and its stakeholders. From this research, we draw implications that are transferrable to numerous types of government science communication efforts within agricultural sectors.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 182 Document Number: C36962
Notes:
9 pages., Describes outcomes of two workshops aimed at documenting and analyzing the experiences gained in building multi-stakeholder partnership in implementing 12 DURAS-funded projects.
13 pages., via online journal., Drawing on the increasing body of literature on policy stakeholders and the ever-growing acknowledgement that communication policy is crafted by more than just parliamentarians and formal communication regulators this paper examines the role that another set of regulators plays in communication policy: agriculture regulators. Based on a study of the United States Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service (RUS), this paper explores alternative agents of communication policy. More specifically, through document analysis we examine the way in which the Rural Utilities Service has shaped rural broadband policy in the United States over the last three decades. The implications for this research are wide, as it brings another policy actor into the policy making melee, and pushes communication policy scholars to consider the role that non-traditional communication regulators play in the communication policy making process.
17 pages, via online journal, In disaster crises, communication among stakeholders and response organizations are important. In Florida, the role of the County Extension Director (CED) is threefold – educational programming, leadership of a county extension program, and county office administrative responsibilities. However, their primary role in disaster emergencies is to facilitate collaborations with state and federal partners. During Hurricane Irma in 2017, UF/IFAS CEDs assisted in response efforts. However, communication efforts can become challenging in such chaotic and stressful situations. This research explored communication challenges among CEDs, clients, and statewide partners in hurricane events. Insights into the communication role of CEDs could enhance UF/IFAS Extension’s communication plan for effective information dissemination post-disaster. The Uses and Gratifications Theory guided this qualitative study. Interviews occurred with nine CEDs from various counties across Florida. Results showed CEDs used numerous communication channels to connect with clients, staff, and statewide partners, mainly for the purposes of information dissemination. The main reasons for selecting these communication channels depended on its accessibility, reliability, and whether it was a usual form of communication. Some participants were unaware of available resources which resulted in duplicate efforts. Thus, they required additional information from statewide partners. Some participants also had difficulty connecting clients with people who could assist them with insurance information and aid. As such, this study recommended a central communication system to avoid redundant efforts, strengthening relationships with disaster agencies to promote information-sharing and avoid miscommunication, and developing a list of resources and contacts for CEDs’ first engagement in disaster response.
