A Qualitative and Quantitative Market Research Report

Background

The WA State Salinity Strategy (Government of Western Australia, 2000) recognises dryland salinity as one of the most critical environmental problems facing Western Australia. Revegetation with woody perennials is seen as the most important of all salinity control options.

‘Intermediaries’ (individuals who mediate between those with the expertise in revegetation and those who require the information) play a key role in revegetation extension in WA.

Diagram 1. A simple model for dissemination of revegetation information in WA.

The Department of Agriculture’s Farm Forestry and Revegetation (FF&R) project uses a variety of communication and training methods to improve access for Intermediaries to best-practice revegetation technology. As such FF&R are very interested in the dissemination of revegetation information in WA.

Objectives

Key Evaluation Questions

This evaluation, instigated by FF&R, should answer the following key questions:

• Q1. How is existing revegetation information perceived?
• Q2. How do Intermediaries feel about extending revegetation information?
• Q3. What are the expressed revegetation information needs/wants of Intermediaries? (What are the expressed information needs/wants of farmers as perceived by Intermediaries?)
• Q4. How effective is revegetation information?
• Q5. How well are Intermediaries information and training needs being met?
• Q6. What information formats do Intermediaries prefer?

Planned Use of Results

Overall, the evaluation has been conducted to document revegetation information and training needs of Intermediaries in order to:

• Plan changes to the current FF&R project;
• Develop recommendations at the FF&R project, SRD Salinity Sub Program Level, Revegetation Information and Training Provider Level and Cross-Agency Level;
• Develop an improved future revegetation information and training structure,
• Assess the effectiveness of existing revegetation information dissemination processes; and
• Fulfil obligations to NHT for funding this project.

Methodology

As many of the questions refer to the needs and opinions of Farm Forestry and Revegetation customers it was appropriate to approach this group for comment.

The two methods chosen for this analysis are Focus Groups and E-mail Survey.

A total of three Focus Group discussions were conducted with 19 Intermediaries interviewed. 57 responses were received for the E-mail Survey (a response rate of 52%).

Results and Discussion

General

Overall, revegetation Intermediaries were moderately confident (or better) about the quality of information, the range of information, ability to pass information on to farmers and access to training. However, there was wide variation, generally related to the amount of time in the role and past experience.

Farmers desires or needs dictate Intermediaries actions. Therefore, the revegetation information and training needs of Intermediaries do reflect very closely the revegetation information and training needs of the communities they represent.

Because the Intermediaries group represent a vast variety of community both geographically and organisationally their expressed revegetation information and training needs are greatly varied. From this study only one clear trend could be outlined. That is the great need for more revegetation information and training on the topic of commercial agroforestry.

Information Resources and Use

Existing information is considered ‘moderately effective’ or ’effective’ as a tool to introduce benefits and assist land managers in good revegetation decision making, by Intermediaries. However, several suggestion for improvement became obvious through the study. Two key suggestions are:

• Information be written with the farmers perspective in mind.
• Revegetation information material must ‘sell’ revegetation as a farming option.

Training Resources and Use

Intermediaries feel their revegetation information and training needs are being met ‘moderately well’ or ‘well’, however, there is a wide variation among Intermediaries. Intermediaries new to the field can feel unsupported in their job overall and have a steep learning curve. They call for more training in general, including more training on revegetation. However, training courses that do exist are often not well attended. Given that Intermediaries were especially keen on training, there may be a lack of publicity/awareness of them. Another reason Intermediaries have difficulty attending revegetation based training is Intermediaries are dictated by farmer desires and needs. Many commented that they would love to be involved in more revegetation work but that is not what farmers always want.

Results indicated the use vs. preference for different information formats. From these results, three classification of formats were identified; Preferred and Used Information Formats, Least Preferred and Least Used Information Formats and Potential Growth Formats.

Preferred and Used Information Formats

This study has identified:

• One to one visits;
• Field days;
• Workshops;
• Guest speakers;
• Peer meetings;
• Demonstrations;
• Newsletters;
• Information kits;
• Farmnotes/Agnotes; and,
• Telephone queries

as the most used and preferred revegetation information formats among Intermediaries.

Least Preferred and Least Used Information Formats

Least used and preferred revegetation information and training formats among Intermediaries include:

• On-line learning courses;
• Greenskills course;
• Master Tree growers course;
• TAFE courses;
• E-mail discussion groups; and
• CD-ROMs.

Potential Growth Formats

Interestingly, a number of formats were preferred by Intermediaries more than they were currently used. These are:

• Demonstrations
• On-line learning courses
• Decision making tools
• E-mail queries
• On-farm practical learning
• Greenskills course
• Master treegrowers course.

This study has identified these formats as potential ‘growth formats’ for extending information on to Intermediaries.

Websites as an Information Format

Websites were an area of contention in the evaluation. Intermediaries can be polarised in their attitudes towards Website information. Many readily use this resource whilst others find it frustrating waiting to log on and searching for sites.

“It’s so time consuming searching for sites, it’s better to go to a Bushcare Officer.”

“There are so many sites and you have to wait for it to download and print out so I prefer to have hard copies on file.”

Many prefer CD formats, such as Rex’96, because of the above reasons. CD’s have the advantage of being easy to access and loan.

Networks are critical for Intermediaries to extend revegetation information.

Networks generally are very important in the extension of revegetation information. This is indicated by the very high use and preference for one to one visits, field days, guest speakers, workshops, peer meetings and telephone queries. Networks are a key issue as Intermediaries are heavily reliant on networks for gathering information and linking farmers with appropriate groups. However, networks and ability to network vary greatly among Intermediaries as was borne out in the Focus Groups. The importance of networking was highlighted in the group process itself with less experienced participants keenly questioning other participants and often being corrected about inaccurate or incomplete knowledge.

Position and Experience of Intermediary

Organisation of employment and number of years in an intermediate position can influence Intermediaries confidence in extending revegetation information.

Consistently, throughout the Focus Group research, experience was recognised as important in relation to an Intermediaries overall effectiveness. Experience influenced size and calibre of networks, ability to source and judge information, methods for dealing with farmer queries and overall confidence in position. With experienced Intermediaries feeling very confident and judged by others as being effective. The qualitative Focus Group information indicated strongly that increased experience lead to increased confidence in extending revegetation information. While conversely little experience led to less confidence in extending revegetation information.

Need for Commercial Agroforestry Information

There is an overwhelming need for revegetation information and training that focuses on commeNrcial agroforestry. Beyond this the revegetation information and training needs of Intermediaries vary widely.

Half of the responses to, ‘Which revegetation topics would you like to see addressed with information and training or more information and training?, related to commercial crops, either generally or specifically e.g. commercial tree species or Floriculture respectively. This represents a significant expressed need in the Intermediary community for more revegetation information and training based on commercial agroforestry options.

Other responses were extremely varied. This indicates that apart from a strong trend towards commercial agroforestry options, the revegetation information needs of Intermediaries are greatly varied. This statement derived from the E-mail Survey is also apparent in the Focus Group results. In fact the Focus Group results go further and identify the source of the revegetation information need; “Intermediaries are dictated by farmer desires and needs.”

Conclusions

This evaluation has answered the following key questions.

Q1. How is existing revegetation information perceived?

Intermediaries are ‘confident’ or ‘moderately confident’ in existing revegetation information. The information is considered to be reliable. There are no concerns about conflicting or inconsistent content.

Q2. How do Intermediaries feel about extending revegetation information?

Intermediaries generally feel ‘informed’ or ‘well informed’ about revegetation options. Those that don’t are either new to their Intermediary position and still developing awareness of revegetation options and networks or are one of the perceived ‘small group of experts’ that are very well informed about revegetation options.

‘Most Intermediaries felt ‘moderately confident’ or ‘confident’ in passing revegetation information on to farmers. This is a result of having a ‘moderately confident’ or ‘confident’ attitude towards the existing revegetation information and a similar attitude toward their own ability to perform general extension with their customers/communities.

However, while the majority of Intermediaries feel ‘moderately confident’ or ‘confident’ in passing revegetation information on to farmers a number feel less confident. This is often related to amount of time in an Intermediary position with new Intermediaries feeling less confident because of isolation, a lack of readily available information, a lack of awareness of revegetation information and training and a feeling of being overwhelmed.

Q3. What are the expressed revegetation information needs/wants of Intermediaries? (What are the expressed information needs/wants of farmers as perceived by Intermediaries?)

Intermediaries are dictated by farmers desires or needs. Therefore, the revegetation information and training needs of Intermediaries do reflect very closely the revegetation information and training needs of the communities they represent.

Also because the Intermediaries group represent a vast variety of community both geographically and organisationally their expressed revegetation information and training needs are also greatly varied.

From this study only one clear trend could be outlined. That is the great need for more revegetation information and training on the topic of commercial agroforestry.

Q4. How effective is revegetation information?

As a tool to introduce benefits and assist land managers in good revegetation decision making existing information is considered ‘moderately effective’ or ‘effective’, by Intermediaries. However, several suggestion for improvement became obvious through the study. Two key suggestions are:

Information be written with the farmers perspective in mind: and

Revegetation information material must ‘sell’ revegetation as a farming option.

Q5. How well are Intermediaries information and training needs being met?

Intermediaries feel their revegetation information and training needs are being met ‘moderately well’ or ‘well’.

However, there is a wide variation surrounding this among Intermediaries. Intermediaries new to the field can feel unsupported in their job overall and have a steep learning curve. They call for more training in general, including more training on revegetation. However, training courses that do exist are often not well attended. Given that Intermediaries in this area were especially keen on training, possibly it was not publicised adequately. Another reason Intermediaries have difficulty attending revegetation based training is Intermediaries are dictated by farmer desires and needs. Many commented that they would love to be involved in more revegetation work but that is not what farmers always want.

Q6. What information formats do Intermediaries prefer?

This study has identified:

• One to one visits;
• Field days;
• Workshops;
• Guest speakers;
• Peer meetings;
• Demonstrations;
• Newsletters;
• Information kits;
• Farmnotes/Agnotes; and,
• Telephone queries

as the most used and preferred revegetation information formats among Intermediaries.

Least used and preferred revegetation information and training formats among Intermediaries include:

• On-line learning courses;
• Greenskills course;
• Master Tree growers course;
• TAFE courses;
• E-mail discussion groups; and
• CD-ROMs.

Interestingly a number of formats were preferred by Intermediaries more than they were currently used. These are:

• Demonstrations;
• On-line learning courses;
• Decision making tools;
• E-mail queries;
• On-farm practical learning;
• Greenskills course; and
• Master treegrowers course.

This study has identified these formats as potential ‘growth formats’ for extending information on to Intermediaries.

Recommendations

Improved Extension

Recommendation 1.1: FF&R make its product more ‘sellable’ by Intermediaries to farmers by,

producing a one page summary of all Information Kits Products available and distributing it widely. The summary should include basic information on each kit as well as clear information as to where to source the kits.

Recommendation 1.2: FF&R more suitably address its audience and use it’s resources more effectively by

Segmenting its audience (by organisation of employment and other relevant qualifying information) and establishing and implementing suitable extension methods and protocols for each segment identified.

Recommendation 1.3: FF&R address concerns over the reliability of results in this study by,

Performing another qualitative study into revegetation information and training needs of the same audience.

Recommendation 1.4: Department of Agriculture SRD Salinity Sub Program overcome labelling as scientific and conservative by

Adopting a ‘marketing’ approach to written material with the aim of ‘selling’ revegetation,

Avoiding a conservative or overtly technical style

Focusing on the ‘bottom line’ benefits to farmers of revegetation.

Recommendation 1.5: All Revegetation information and training providers assist Intermediaries in quickly and easily identifying information suitable for them by

Qualifying existing and future information by biogeographical indicators (e.g. Rainfall and Soil type).

Information Formats

Recommendation 2.1: FF&R take advantage of the popularity of revegetation demonstrations by,

Investigating the effectiveness and efficiency of demonstrations in learning and influencing adoption.

Recommendation 2.2: All revegetation information and training providers take advantage of the popularity of revegetation demonstrations by,

Identify and develop suitable revegetation demonstration sites.

Recommendation 2.3: All NRM Projects providing extension to Intermediaries take advantage of ‘growth’ extension formats with the Intermediary audience by

Expanding input into demonstrations, E-mail queries and on-farm practical learning as an extension medium to this audience.

Recommendation 2.4: All NRM Projects providing extension to Intermediaries prevent inefficient use of time and resources by,

Reviewing Formal community meetings, Conferences, Displays/stands at expos and reports as a primary extension tools aimed at the Intermediary audience.

Recommendation 2.5: All NRM Projects providing extension to Intermediaries take advantage of new and increasingly adopted technology by

Making their written extension information readily available to Intermediaries in electronic format that can be easily E-mailed and downloaded

Information Topics

Recommendation 3.1: FF&R overcome a general lack of knowledge in the farming community (especially in the low rainfall zone, >400mm/yr) about the basics of revegetation by

• Developing a Revegetation Information Kit that addresses the following common farmer questions:
• Where should I put the trees?
• What should I plant?
• Where do I get it?
• What do I need to do to this site?
• Will it solve my problems down slope?
• Do I have to fence it?
• When can I graze it/how palatable is it?
• Will it contribute to fire management?

Training

Recommendation 4.1: All Revegetation information and training providers address a lack of awareness of revegetation training available by

Documenting and promoting existing training opportunities.

Recommendation 4.2: All Revegetation Information providers overcome a general lack of revegetation training (especially in the low rainfall zone) by

Increase resourcing of training and improve access to training.

Networking/Liaison

Recommendation 5.1: FF&R overcome a lack of awareness of revegetation information and training, networks, and confidence in revegetation extension in new Intermediaries by

quickly identifying Intermediaries new to their position, personally visiting them and introducing them to basic revegetation information, training and networks.

Recommendation 5.2: FF&R project assist Intermediaries build diverse and high calibre networks and information resource libraries by,

• Developing an easily accessible revegetation contacts database and,
• Developing an easily accessible revegetation bibliographic database.

References

1. Caracelli, V.J, and Greene J.C. (1997) Crafting mixed-method evaluation designs. In J.C. Greene and V.J. Caracelli (Eds) Advances in mixed method evaluation: The challenge and Benefits of Integrated Diverse Paradigms, New Directions for Evaluation, No74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (pp. 19 – 32).

2. Foddy, W. (1993), Constructing Questions for Interviews and Questionnaires, Cambridge University Press.

3. Government of Western Australia (2000), Natural resource Management in Western Australia: The Salinity Strategy.

4. Pannell, P.B. and Pannell, D.J. (1999). Introduction to Social Surveying: Pitfalls, Potential Problems and Preferred Practices. SEA Working Paper 99/04, http://www.general.uwa.edu.au/u/dpannell/seameth3