Context evaluation: a profile of irrigator climate knowledge, needs and practices in the northern Murray–Darling Basin to aid development of climate-based decision support tools and information and dissemination of research

Abstract

Understanding client needs, knowledge and practices offers a means of ensuring research outputs match intended audience requirements. This paper shows the initial impact of context evaluation on the development of a suite of decision support tools and information to help irrigators better manage their water resources under different climatic conditions. The context evaluation study involved a survey of ~170 irrigators in the northern MurrayÐDarling Basin in Australia. It sought to clarify how they make cropping area and water management decisions and their levels of understanding and use of climate information. We found irrigators consult widely on cropping decisions and those with large areas commonly apply the Southern Oscillation Index to property decisions. Respondents demonstrated a reasonably good understanding of climate phenomena in an Southern Oscillation Index knowledge test. Two-thirds use seasonal climate outlook information, but only 20% are very confident to apply climate information to decisions. More than half would find a decision support system (comprising tools and information) useful for cropping decisions. Almost 75% would change their crop area, and 43% their crop type, if given advance information about water availability up to 4 months ahead of irrigation season. About 70% have access to a computer and half to the internet, but two-thirds consider their personal computing skill is only nil or basic. Twenty-three percent of respondents expressed interest in working directly with the research team to interact regarding their requirements, indicating the potential for future participative research activities such as collaborative, on-farm research. The context evaluation facilitated formation of a focus group that cooperated to assess research findings and incorporate improvements to the projectÕs set of decision support tools. The evaluation was a new experience for the researchers and, albeit an arms-length consultation process, it has broadened our knowledge about our target audience and their preferred ways to access research findings.