BEPs Research Navigation
Audience Description:
Landowners are: people who own property and use it for residential, recreational, forestry, or agricultural purposes. People who work the land, such as farmers or loggers, are described as separate target audiences.
Study-Specific BEPs
These study-specific Best Education Practices distill findings derived from the studies listed in the References below, which were identified using a meta-analysis technique. In summarizing research for the Landowner audience we provide an example of all findings now available in the Target Audience Database, referencing research from 1988-2008. Other audience summaries in this collection itemize only findings used in the 2004 report. The extended collection of findings, referencing research from 1988-2008, is available for other target audiences in Search Findings.
Outreach Themes: BEPs are described by one or more of seven focus areas.
|
Outreach Themes |
Research Recommendations |
|---|---|
|
The Audience |
In landowner or renter situations:
Identify characteristics of landowners that could influence interest in conservation practices. Match the information technology delivery mechanism to the computer work style of the landowner. How does the landowner already use the computer the landowner? |
|
Message content |
Keep the message simple. Include information that shows how the message affects landowners personally and what specific actions landowners can take to improve the situation. Acknowledge landowner interest and concern for the quality of their land. Be aware of the boundary between education and advocacy. Emphasize local elements of control. Link conservation, stewardship, and watershed topics to a particular place on the owner’s land. Provide clear information about goals and plans for land parcels. Provide regular feedback about how well goals and plans have been achieved. |
|
Message delivery vehicle |
Provide agriculture landowners with written materials in addition to whatever other communication methods are selected. Trusted individuals can deliver messages effectively. |
|
Outreach strategy |
Base your program design on specifically identified needs. Base the outreach or education process on mutual understanding, trust, and respect that leads landowners to choose to comply because they see it in their best interest. Emphasize an “integrated” program that provides a continuum of information, communication, and education resources. Engage audience in planning. Tap into indigenous knowledge of local land stewards, especially since recommended, best-bet practices may have uncertain results in local application. Use a variety of outreach methods, with each targeted at specific, desired behaviors. Plan for the time it takes to adopt new ideas. Be aware of the boundary between education and advocacy. Be aware of the larger political issues and contexts in which water quality outreach and education take place (such as legislative requirements):
|
|
Public participation |
Create opportunities to build landowner participation in the activities of landowner groups. Provide groups with training to help develop leadership and organization skills. |
|
Supporting and motivating professionals |
No research available |
|
Evaluation |
Make time for continuous evaluation in order to best determine next steps. Provide clear information about goals and plans. Provide regular feedback about how well goals and plans have been achieved. |
Linking Study-Specific BEPs to Essential BEPs
Essential BEPs provide an overview of Best Education Practices derived from education theory and other meta-analysis studies. This table shows which Essential BEPs are highlighted by research about landowners as a target audience. The entire collection of Essential BEPs is available on the Water Outreach website.
|
Education for: |
The learning experience: |
|---|---|
|
The Individual |
Is learner centered, and consequently encourages the learner to set meaningful learning goals and to take personal responsibility for their own learning. |
|
The Class or Group |
Is designed to focus on a targeted audience and is built on an understanding of audience skills and interests. Content and delivery is determined in cooperation with the target audience and stakeholders. Presents accurate and balanced information, incorporating many different perspectives. Incorporates methods for assessing the value of the experience, especially as it relates to desired outcomes. |
|
Web-Based Learning |
No relevant research findings |
|
The Community |
Evolves from work with a coalition or group. Takes into consideration the community as a whole, including: socio-political, economic, historical, and cultural influences. Builds on locally existing skills and resources. Is flexible in response to both process and conditions. Provides training to increase skills needed to accomplish goals identified by the group. Takes place close to the location where people practice a behavior of concern. Builds effectiveness through linkages to other communities, partners, and resources. Reaches people in multiple ways. Provides participants with feedback about the results of their actions. |
|
Beyond the Community |
No relevant research findings |
Supporting References
Cobourn, J., & Donaldson, S. (1997). Reaching a new audience. Journal of Extension, 35(1), 5.
Constance, D. H., Rikoon, S. J., & Ma, J. C. (1996). Landlord involvement in environmental decision-making on rented Missouri cropland: Pesticide use and water quality issues. Rural Sociology, 61(4), 577-605.
Curtis, A., & DeLacy, T. (1995). Evaluating landcare groups in Australia: How they facilitate partnerships between agencies, community groups, and researchers. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 50(1), 15-20.
Force, D., & Bills, N. (1989). Participation in the CRP: Implications of the New York experience. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation,44(5), 512-516.
Howell, J. L., & Habron, G. B. (2004). Agricultural landowners’ lack of preference for Internet Extension. Journal of Extension, 42(6), 10.
Johnson, S. E., & Jacobs, H. M. (1994). Public education for growth management: Lessons from Wisconsin’s farmland preservation program. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 49(4), 333-338.
Newton, B. J. (2001). Environmental education and outreach: Experiences of a federal agency. BioScience, 51(4), 297-299.
Ransley, L. (2003). The outreach continuum: Moving participants from information to action. Paper presented at the Nonpoint Source Pollution Information and Education Programs, Chicago, IL.
Voege, H., & Wagner, N. (1997). How do forest landowners learn? A study of resource agency/landowner interaction in northern California. Sacramento: Prepared for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection by The Training Source.
Wolf, A. T. (1995). Rural nonpoint source pollution control in Wisconsin: The limits of a voluntary program? Water Resources Bulletin, 31(6), 1009-1022.
