Progress 09/01/06 to 08/31/11
Outputs
Target Audience: The target audience for this project are policy makers, conservation specialists, nutrient advisors, crop advisors, and farmers, and others who have a stake in identifying alternative methods of minimizing nutrient and soil loss from tilled fields. The effort to reduce nutrient and soil losses is in contstant search for the most cost effective programs to reduce losses that maximizes the impact of limited available funding for conservation tools that reduce nutirent abatement. This reasearch will explore the efficiecy of paying farmers to achieve the greatest impact in allowing economic decision making on part of the producer drive decisions that are found to be effective in reducing nutrient abatement and yet provide more effective tools to implement new programs. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? 1) The project participated in the Policy Conference for CB in March 2011 where the projects work was highlighted in presentations by Dr. Jim Shortle and Dr. Marc Ribaudo. 2) The project team also developed an innovative idea to improve the cost-effectiveness of the MD Cover Crop cost-share program by rewarding farmers for quantified N performance using the FSNT and allowing them to determine (in August) which of their fields actually need a winter cover crop to absorb excess N. 3) The project developed a poster to highlight this idea. The poster was presented at the Soil and Water Conservation Society Annual Meeting in DC in July and at the National Conference on Ecosystem Restoration in Baltimore in August. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
The educational objectives have been very effective, with each of the participating farmers learning how to use the tools presented in this project to determine the amount of residual N in the soil of each field near the end of the growing season to determine on which fields a cover crop is necessary to absorb excess N and prevent nitrate losses. By knowing this information in late August, the producers have the option of flying on (aerial application) cover crop seed into a standing crop of corn or beans. This early application of the cover crop allows for early establishment, greater growth, and more N absorption from the soil. By being rewarded for progressively lower FSNT values, measured in November (when N loss starts to become much more prevalent), the farmers have examined many different actions that they can take throughout the year to reduce residual N. Such actions include reduced N application rates, changing application methods, changing crop rotations, and other changes. The project’s outreach on this approach has reached an estimated 300 people by presenting the poster at two large conferences during this reporting period. Teh results indicate we have delivered a science based, stakeholder driven, participatory process to come up with recommendations that are used and implemented by farmers to achieve lower nitrogen abatement at minimal cost to the program yet maximizing results for the farmer.
Publications
|
Progress 09/01/09 to 08/31/10
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Our project identified and emailed 64 watershed coordinators with information about the concept of performance-based incentives and the services that our project has to offer. Numerous inquiries for further information resulted from this outreach. More detailed information packets were mailed out to those requesting further information. The packets contained the project's booklet describing the process of developing stakeholder-driven, watershed-level recommendations for the use of performance-based incentives for agricultural pollution control, as well as previously published papers on the topic. Conference calls were then commenced with staff from 3 watersheds to help them create a plan for developing recommendations. In February 2010, the project held a workshop at the National Water Conference in Hilton Head. The purpose was to allow participants to understand and start the process of designing recommendations for their watersheds, that they could then take back and develop further with local stakeholders. In April 2010, the project presented an invited paper at the Managing Agricultural Landscapes II conference in Denver to an audience of over 50 people. In July, the project presented information at 3 watershed field days in Iowa in conjunction with ISU Extension. In July, the project commenced work with Cannon River Watershed Partnership in Minnesota to develop recommendations. The first meeting generated a lot interest and enthusiasm. In addition to farmers, researchers, and agency staff, the MN State Conservation participated. Initial recommendations were outlined. A second meeting was held in September to review the results of investigations into the initial recommendations. A final recommendation was completed at the third meeting (during Year 5 of the project). Periodic issues of PEPA-eNews were distributed to our list of over 700 persons. These covered updates in project activities, new information and articles, and other relevant resources. PARTICIPANTS: Jonathan Winsten, Ph.D. has been actively engaged in conducting outreach and facilitation sessions. Dr. Winsten has also been involved in engaging new networks of potential project facilitation candidates. Jeffrey Apigian, M.S. started in 2009 as a project assistant. He conducts research, outreach, and administrative functions as necessary. Pia Mayer has been providing administrative support to the project. The project is implemented as a partnership between the Department of Community Development and Applied Economics at the University of Vermont and Winrock International. The project maintains a National Advisory Team, which is comprised of 14 individuals external to project staff including: Sandra Batie, Jeff Zinn, James Shortle, Otto Doering, John Rodecap, Frank Casey, Marc Ribaudo, Jerry Miller, Pete Nowak, Andrew Sharpley, David Zilberman, Thomas Christensen, Jim Wood and Roberta Parry. Actively involved during this reporting period were the co-authors of the white paper on performance measures, including Claire Baffaut (USDA-ARS), Joseph Britt (Sand County Foundation), Tatiana Borisova (U of Florida), Chad Ingels and Susan Brown (Iowa State University Extension). Watershed contacts who participated substantively in the project during this reporting period(for other contacts, see previous reports) include: Nik Stong-Cvetich (Santa Cruz RCD), Katie Montano (Driscoll's Berries); from the Cannon River watershed: Beth Kallestad, Glen Roberson, Brad Carlson, Ed McNamara, Gary and Georgia Joachim, George Boody, and George Rehm; from Iowa: Jeffrey Pape, David Krapfl, Richard Sloan, Marty Schwers, and Chad Ingels. TARGET AUDIENCES: The project is creating awareness among stakeholders, agencies, and scientists in the 10 water quality regions of the U.S. on the use of performance-based incentives. This objective is being achieved largely by giving presentations at conferences and meetings related to water quality and agricultural pollution control. Efforts are being made to reach farmers and local-level stakeholders through watershed-level meetings. The project has also established project liaisons all 10 EPA regions and is trying to use these liaisons to help identify outreach opportunities, interested watersheds, and will assist in implementing the PEPA process. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Several important outcomes were achieved during Year 4 of this project. Some of the most important outcomes include the following. From working with watershed groups in Iowa, we were able to understand and convey some important issues about motivating producers to participate in conservation activities. This information was then shared widely through our newsletter and in all of our discussions and participation with watershed stakeholders and conservation policy advocates. As a result, at least two watersheds are trying to develop farmer-led watershed councils as a vehicle through which to implement performance-based incentives. As a result of our project, the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County applied for and was awarded a state-level Conservation Innovation Grant to implement a performance-based incentives project in collaboration with Driscoll's, one of the world's largest fresh berry companies. Our project has been providing guidance to the RCD on their project, based on our lessons learned in other watersheds. The watershed coordinator of the Four Rivers Basin watershed in Kentucky, Maggie Morgan, has also expressed an interested in getting a performance-based incentives project developed in her watershed.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 09/01/08 to 08/31/09
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Activities and Events: Since September 2008, the project has moved from a general outreach focus to one of targeting watersheds that may be good candidates for the use of performance-based incentives. This includes a set of facilitated stakeholder meetings in Goodwater Creek watershed of central Missouri, as well as the Choptank River watershed in Maryland. Specific recommendations for the use of performance-based incentives were developed for each watershed with the input of farmers, agency staff, scientists, and citizens. Discussions on identifying watersheds and developing recommendations were held with sets of extension water quality staff in Montana, Colorado, California, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Iowa, and Arkansas. The database of recipients of the project newsletter, PEPA eNews, has grown to over 800. The project convened a set of experts to help develop a white paper on measuring performance related to agricultural nonpoint source pollution. During this process, two symposia were held to collect input for the paper. The symposia were held in St. Louis at the National Water Conference and in Dearborne, MI at the Soil and Water Conservation Society annual meeting. Seminars on performance-based incentives were also given by project staff at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition annual meeting near Kansas City in November 2008 and University of Vermont in February 2009. A project paper was presented at the 2009 Northeast Agriculture and Resource Economics Association meetings. An article describing the concept of performance-based incentives was published in the Journal of Soil and Water Conservation in the May-June 2009 issue. During this reporting period, the project also initiated a dialogue with staff at USDA who are responsible for implementing the Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act (RCA), in which improving the performance of current and future USDA programs in central. Interviews with farmers and agency staff were recorded during the summer of 2009 for use in the project video being created by Full Spectrum Productions of Des Moines, Iowa. The project was approached by faculty of the Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research to explore cooperation on further development of this concept. PARTICIPANTS: Jonathan Winsten, Ph.D. has been actively engaged in conducting outreach and facilitation sessions. Dr. Winsten has also been involved in engaging new networks of potential project facilitation candidates. Jeffrey Apigian, M.S. started in 2009 as a project assistant. He conducts research, outreach, and administrative functions as necessary. Pia Mayer has been providing administrative support to the project. The project is implemented as a partnership between the Department of Community Development and Applied Economics at the University of Vermont and Winrock International. The project maintains a National Advisory Team, which is comprised of 14 individuals external to project staff including: Sandra Batie, Jeff Zinn, James Shortle, Otto Doering, John Rodecap, Frank Casey, Marc Ribaudo, Jerry Miller, Pete Nowak, Andrew Sharpley, David Zilberman, Thomas Christensen, Jim Wood and Roberta Parry. Actively involved during this reporting period were the co-authors of the white paper on performance measures, including Claire Baffaut (USDA-ARS), Joseph Britt (Sand County Foundation), Tatiana Borisova (U of Florida), Chad Ingels and Susan Brown (Iowa State University Extension). Watershed contacts who participated in the project during this reporting period(for other contacts, see previous reports) include: Perry Cabot (Arkansas and Rio Grande River watersheds); Joel Schneekloth (lower S. Platte and Republican River watersheds); Denis Reich (Upper Colorado and Gunnison River watersheds); and Bob Pearson (Upper S. Platte River watershed), Troy Bauder (CSU Extension), from the Nashanic River watershed in New Jersey: Abigail Jones, Christopher Testa, Zeyuan Qiu, and Christine Hall. From Wisconsin, Dennis Frame, Elisa Graffy,Jim Lorman, and Andy Holschbach. From California, Jessica Fox, Marti Johnson, Chris Goodson, and Lucia Somberg. From Georgia, Kristin Rowles. From USDA NRCS and ARS, Harbans Lal, Jorge Delgado, and Marvin Shaffer. TARGET AUDIENCES: The project is creating awareness among stakeholders, agencies, and scientists in the 10 water quality regions of the U.S. on the use of performance-based incentives. This objective is being achieved largely by giving presentations at conferences and meetings related to water quality and agricultural pollution control. Efforts are being made to reach farmers and local-level stakeholders through watershed-level meetings. The project has also established project liaisons all 10 EPA regions and is trying to use these liaisons to help identify outreach opportunities, interested watersheds, and will assist in implementing the PEPA process. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Outreach that the project has engaged in has resulted in dozens of inquiries and requests for further information. This is particularly noticeable after issues of PEPA eNews are distributed. By imparting knowledge that rewarding farmers for specific environmental performance can induce innovative solutions and lead to more cost-effective outcomes, the recipients of this knowledge are now able to consider transforming their efforts towards the use of performance-based incentives to improve water quality. In Missouri, after developing recommendations for the use of performance-based incentives, the scientists who participated in the process began to develop a pesticide pollution index that could be used to estimate actual losses from specific fields. The coordinators of this work in Missouri were then to seek funding to pilot-test the use of performance-based incentives in the Goodwater Creek watershed. In the Choptank River watershed, the project's facilitation process resulted in the use of a Fall Soil Nitrate Test to determine how much excess nitrogen was present after harvest and available to be lost during winter and spring soil saturation.
Publications
- Winsten, Jonathan R. Improving the cost-effectiveness of agricultural pollution control: The use of performance-based incentives. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 64(3):88A-93A 2009.
- Jonathan R. Winsten, Claire Baffaut, Joseph Britt, Tatiana Borisova, Chad Ingels, and Susan Brown. 2009. Performance-based Incentives for Agricultural Pollution Control: Identifying and Assessing Performance Measures. To be submitted to Water Policy.
- Winsten, Jonathan R., Chesnutt, Mandy K. 2009. PEPA eNews. Newsletter focused on performance-based incentives for agricultural pollution control.
|
Progress 09/01/07 to 08/31/08
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Activities and Events: Since September 2007, the project has conducted 16 outreach sessions in 9 states (6 EPA Regions) and has reached 636 individuals. Three of theses sessions were by invitation from watersheds groups that have been exposed to the PEPA concept through this project and would like to develop recommendations for using performance-based incentives. Two of the groups are in the Central Coast region of California; vegetable growers in the Salinas Valley and cattle ranchers in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The third group is working in a CEAP watershed in Central Missouri. These three meetings were the first step in starting the PEPA implementation process in those watersheds by introducing the concept to a full suite of local stakeholders. The project's poster presentation at the Soil and Water Conservation Society's annual meeting was awarded second prize and brought significant attention to the project. Products: From January through August of 2008 alone, nearly 100 information packets, containing comprehensive project information, have been distributed to interested and targeted contacts. Since the beginning of the project, over 2,200 brochures have been distributed through conferences, meetings, information packets, and our network of contacts. In early 2008, the PEPA process document, entitled Developing Performance-Based Incentives for Agricultural Pollution Control: Incorporating Recommendations into Your Watershed Plan, was completed. Since publication, over 120 copies have been distributed. Other materials that have been created and distributed include: project posters, a one-page project summary, a watershed criteria document, an introduction to meeting facilitation, reports on the preliminary results of PEPA pilot-testing in Iowa and Vermont, and outreach power point presentations. In 2008, the project began a significant Web site redesign which increased the appearance and ease of use of the site, but also provided significantly more information to the public including all project publications as well as journal articles related to performance-based incentives, agricultural pollution, environmental modeling, etc. In June 2008, the project began distributing a quarterly newsletter entitled PEPA e-News by email. The newsletter provides information on the PEPA concept, recent project news, results from our pilot-testing project, information about watersheds involved in the PEPA process, and other relevant information with links back to the project Web site. Currently, the newsletter reaches over 750 contacts and this grows with each distribution. Lastly, filming and production has begun on a PEPA informational outreach video. Completion is expected by spring 2009 and will be distributed shortly thereafter. PARTICIPANTS: Jonathan Winsten, Ph.D. is the Principal Investigator and Research Assistant Professor at The University of Vermont. He has been actively engaged in conducting outreach and facilitation sessions. Dr. Winsten has also been involved in engaging new networks of potential project facilitation candidates. Mandy Chesnutt is the Project Coordinator and Research Specialist at The University of Vermont. Mandy coordinates project outreach, information on the Web site, event logistics, development of educational and outreach materials, and budgetary and administrative oversight. Partner Organizations include: Department of Community Development and Applied Economics and the Center for Rural Studies at the University of Vermont, Winrock International's Ecosystem Services Unit, and Iowa State University's Extension System. Training and Development opportunities: University of Vermont student Sean Dempsey was active in the project's web-design and administrative data collection such as time reporting and consulting on management of information systems. Tenzin Lhakhang is a University of Vermont undergraduate student providing assistance with the Web site redesign, updating Web site content, and other IT issues. University of Vermont graduate student, Jessica Hyman and undergraduate student, Ekaterina Adrievskaia provide design, formatting, and publications skills to project education and outreach materials as needed. As students at the University of Vermont these activities contributed to the student's training/professional development. Collaborators and Contacts include: Sean Grimland, GIS Analyst at Winrock International and the project's National Advisory Team, which is comprised of 14 individuals external to project staff including: Sandra Batie, Jeff Zinn, James Shortle, Otto Doering, John Rodecap, Frank Casey, Marc Ribaudo, Jerry Miller, Pete Nowak, Andrew Sharpley, David Zilberman, Thomas Christensen, Jim Wood and Roberta Parry. Several collaborators for watersheds around the U.S. have been instrumental in this project. These people include: Mark Trenholm, Executive Director, Tillamook Estuaries Partnership; Wym Matthews, CAFO Program Manager, Oregon Department of Agriculture; Rob Emanuel, Water Resources & Community Development Educator, Oregon Sea Grant; Sean Reiersgaard, Environment Manager, Tillamook Cooperative Creamery Association; Kent Newman, Videographer; Tom Fisher, Professor, University of Maryland; Virgil Dupuis, 1994 LGU water quality contact; Sam Dennis, 1890 LGU water quality contact; Lisa Lurie, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary; Claire Baffaut, Research Hydrologist, University of Missouri; Bob Broz, Project Manager, University of Missouri; James Bauder, Tillage/Soils Specialist, Montana State University; and many others from around the country. TARGET AUDIENCES: The project is creating awareness among stakeholders, agencies, and scientists in the 10 water quality regions of the U.S. on the use of performance-based incentives. This objective is being achieved largely by giving presentations at conferences and meetings related to water quality and agricultural pollution control. Efforts are being made to reach farmers and local-level stakeholders through watershed-level meetings. The project has also established project liaisons seven EPA regions and is working to identify liaisons in the remaining three. These liaisons will help identify outreach opportunities, interested watersheds, and will assist in implementing the PEPA process. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Post-presentation surveys completed by outreach session attendees allow us to track reported changes in knowledge. The results indicate that 96.2 percent feel that the presentation contributed either "Extremely Well" or "Somewhat Well" to their understanding of the PEPA concept. When asked, "On a scale of 1-10, with 1 meaning "extremely unclear" and 10 meaning "extremely clear", how would you rate the overall clarity of this presentation, 89 percent of respondents answered this question with a score of 7 or higher. This indicates that the vast majority of outreach session attendees found the presentation clear and that the presentation contributed significantly to their understanding of the PEPA concept. When asked, "On a scale of 1-10, with 1 meaning "not at all" and 10 meaning "very much so", do you think performance-based incentives could work for agricultural pollution control in your watershed" 68 percent of respondents answered this question with a score of 7 or higher. When asked, "On a scale of 1-10, with 1 meaning "not at all" and 10 meaning "very much so", do you think performance-based incentives could work for agricultural pollution control in general" 80 percent of respondents answered this question with a score of 7 or higher. This indicates that the majority of outreach session attendees believe that the PEPA concept is feasible. Additionally, the outreach sessions have led several individuals to express interest in implementing the PEPA concept in their watersheds. This has resulted in initial PEPA implementation meetings in the Central California Coast and Central Missouri watersheds. Farmers, agency staff, researchers and other stakeholders attended the meetings and were presented with initial PEPA information and began a discussion of potential appropriate performance measures, incentives, and implementation methods. Follow-up watershed meetings to move forward in the process are scheduled for late 2008 and early 2009. As this process moves forward in indicates a change in knowledge and actions on behalf of watershed stakeholders.
Publications
- PEPA process document entitled Developing Performance-Based Incentives for Agricultural Pollution Control: Incorporating Recommendations into Your Watershed Plan, 2008. Project Tri-fold Brochures, 2007. Project One-page Summary, 2007. Preliminary Results from Pilot-Testing Projects in Iowa and Vermont,2007. Watershed Criteria Document, 2008. Introduction to Facilitation Document, 2008. Project Posters, 2007. Project PowerPoint Presentations, 2007-2008. PEPA e-News, 2008. All publications are made available to the public through the project website at www.flexincentives.org.
|
Progress 09/01/06 to 08/31/07
Outputs
OUTPUTS: A six-panel informational brochure was created introducing the performance-based incentives concept and providing project information intended for a broad audience. Information packets on the project were mailed to Regional Water Quality Project Directors, as well as the NIWQP 1890 and 1994 Land Grant University contacts. The packets included project brochures and description of how the project could help achieve mutual goals of improved policies for agricultural pollution control. We are in the early stages of producing an informational video for use in educational and outreach activities. Selection of a videographer has been made and production is scheduled to begin in Year 2 of the project. Articles were printed in Agri News, an independent agricultural newspaper distributed in Minnesota and Iowa. The articles highlighted the efforts of groups working in conjunction with the PEPA initiative. The project website was created in Year 1 and is designed to be accessible and
useful for the general public and practitioners seeking project information, performance-based incentives materials, water-quality related news, and contact information for the project staff and related personnel. Project staff have developed a PEPA process document entitled Developing Performance-Based Incentives for Agricultural Pollution Control: Incorporating Recommendations into Your Watershed Plan. The document compliments other educational and outreach materials and guides watershed-level practitioners step-by-step through the process of establishing performance-based incentives for their area. The document is in the final stages of design and publication and should be available for distribution in early 2008. A National Advisory Team (NAT) was identified early in the project and is comprised of leading researchers and agency staff working on issues related to performance-based incentives, leading scientists dealing with the bio-physical connections between farming and water
quality, and leading farm and watershed leaders who are directly involved in the PEPA initiative. Outreach presentations are a primary vehicle for achieving the project's education and outreach goals. Presentations have been made at national, regional, and local conferences and to targeted groups, particularly local watershed organizations. In addition, project staff began the facilitation process with one watershed and plan on taking this first step with other watershed groups in the near future. The facilitation process consists of the following steps: 1) Invite stakeholders, agencies, and scientists represented in the watershed to come together. 2) Conduct an initial meeting to increase understanding of performance-based incentives, prioritize water quality issues, and identify performance measures specific to the watershed. 3) Conduct a second meeting to draw from decisions in the first meeting and complete a general recommendation for implementing performance-based incentives in
the watershed. 4) Write-up recommendations for use of performance-based incentives in the watershed.
PARTICIPANTS: Project staff includes: Principal Investigator, Fred Schmidt, Ph.D. - Director, Center for Rural Studies, University of Vermont Fred has been essential in providing oversight and guidance on the project and project activities. Project Director, Jonathan Winsten, Ph.D. - Research Assistant Professor, University of Vermont. Jon has been actively engaged in conducting outreach and facilitation sessions. He has also been pivotal in engaging new networks of potential project facilitation candidates. Additionally, he manages the project budgets and other essential administrative tasks. Project Coordinator, Michael Moser, M.S. - Research Project Specialist, Center for Rural Studies, University of Vermont. Michael has acted as both a project manager and as an evaluator. He has developed survey instruments in hard copy and online, collected and analyzed data and developed project databases. Project Assistant, Liron Weiss - University of Vermont Liron has undertaken project
administrative functions including recording meetings and organization of project materials in hard copy and web-based formats. Partner Organizations include: University of Vermont: Department of Community Development and Applied Economics and the Center for Rural Studies Winrock International: Ecosystem Services Unit Iowa State University: ISU Extension System Training and Development opportunities include: Sean Dempsey was active in the project's web-design and administrative data collection such as time reporting and consulting on management of information systems. As a student at the University of Vermont these activities contributed to Sean's training/professional development. University of Vermont graduate student, Jessica Hyman and undergraduate student, Ekaterina Adrievskaia provided design, formatting, and publications skills to project education and outreach materials. Collaborators and Contacts include: The Project's National Advisory Team was instrumental in developing
project processes and providing valuable networking resources for activities. The NAT is comprised of 14 individuals external to project staff including: Sandra Batie, Jeff Zinn, James Shortle, Otto Doering, John Rodecap, Frank Casey, Marc Ribaudo, Jerry Miller, Pete Nowak, Andrew Sharpley, David Zilberman, Thomas Christensen, Jim Wood and Roberta Parry. Sean Grimland, GIS Analyst, Winrock International Several collaborators for watersheds around the U.S. have been instrumental in this project during its first year. These people include: Mark Trenholm, Executive Director, Tillamook Estuaries Partnership Wym Matthews, CAFO Program Manager, Oregon Department of Agriculture Rob Emanuel, Water Resources & Community Development Educator, Oregon Sea Grant Sean Reiersgaard, Environment Manager, Tillamook Cooperative Creamery Association Kent Newman, Videographer Tom Fisher, Professor, University of Maryland Virgil Dupuis, 1994 LGU water quality contact Sam Dennis, 1890 LGU water quality
contact
TARGET AUDIENCES: The project is attempting to create broad awareness among stakeholders, agencies, and scientists in the 10 water quality regions of the U.S. on the use of performance-based incentives. This objective is being achieved largely by giving presentations at conferences and meetings related to water quality and agricultural pollution control. Additionally, efforts are being made to reach farmers, and local-level stakeholders through watershed-level meetings. Priorities are being given for outreach to those working with undeserved stakeholders. A presentation was recently made at the Southern Regional Water Quality Conference where an additional meeting and presentation reached out to all of the 1890s Land Grant Institutions present. This was coordinated with the 1890s National Facilitation project. In December 2006 a presentation was made at the Inter-tribal Agricultural Council annual meeting in Las Vegas. Follow-up with members of both audiences is in process. In
addition to the minority audiences discussed above, our target audience includes as many people as possible who are working on issues of agriculture, water quality, or other related fields.
Impacts
The brochure was distributed to over 600 individuals through conferences, presentations, watershed-level meetings, and targeted mailings and handouts. Additionally, over 60 information packets were mailed to 1890 and 1994 Land Grant institution water quality contacts and Regional Water Quality Program Directors. The project web site received over 500 hits in the first year and while serving as a clearinghouse for project information is being used to collect surveys for project evaluation. Four articles highlighting the efforts of watershed groups working with the project were printed in Agri News, an independent agricultural newspaper distributed in Minnesota and Iowa. The articles were also made available online. A 14-member National Advisory Team was assembled to advise project staff. The team is actively engaged in utilizing and reviewing the project materials and is instrumental in networking and outreach. Presentations are a primary outreach and education vehicle.
Audiences have included farmers, scientists and local, regional and national policy-makers. Project staff have presented at seven professional conferences, reaching more than 200 participants. Presentations have been given at nine watershed and targeted outreach sessions reaching nearly 100 participants. Additionally, project personnel conducted one primary watershed-level facilitation session with the Tillamook Bay watershed in Oregon. The session did not lead to a consensus on implementing performance measures. However, it has lead to the creation of a research proposal for similar work within the watershed. Further discussions and outreach are expected. Participant data from presentations and facilitation meetings were recorded in an attempt to document changes in knowledge. Over 39percent of responding participants identified as researchers, 26percent as state government representatives, over 17percent as federal government reps and nearly 9percent were as farmers. While
89.5percent of participant respondents reported being either "somewhat" or "extremely familiar" with the concept of performance-based incentives before attending their session, the data showed that these sessions further contributed to their understanding of the concept. Overall, 87.5percent felt that the session they attended contributed "somewhat well" or "extremely well". 100percent of farmer respondents reported that their session contributed "extremely well". 100percent of federal government representatives reported that their session contributed "extremely well" or "somewhat well". Over 83percent of state government representatives reported that their session contributed "extremely well" or "somewhat well". And nearly 89percent of researchers reported that their session contributed "somewhat" or "extremely well" to their understanding. When asked to rate on a scale of 1-10 how well performance-based incentives could work for agricultural pollution control, the overall mean
response was 7. Farmers responded most positively with a mean response of 8. Federal government representatives' response was 7.5 while state government reps and researchers' mean responses were 6.7 and 6.6 respectively.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
|