Evaluation of the impact of Lifetimewool on sheep producers
A. Jones A G , A. J. van Burgel A , R. Behrendt B , M. Curnow A , D. J. Gordon B D , C. M. Oldham C , I. J. Rose C and A. N. Thompson B E FA Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, 494 Albany Highway, Albany, WA 6330, Australia.
B Department of Primary Industries Victoria, Private Bag 105, Hamilton, Vic. 3300, Australia.
C Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, 3 Baron-Hay Court, South Perth, WA 6151, Australia.
D Present address: Rural Industries Skill Training, Private Bag 105, Hamilton, Vic. 3300, Australia.
E Present address: Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, 3 Baron-Hay Court, South Perth, WA 6151, Australia.
F Present address: School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia.
G Corresponding author. Email: anne.jones@agric.wa.gov.au
Animal Production Science 51(9) 857-865 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA08303
Submitted: 15 December 2008 Accepted: 1 July 2010 Published: 14 September 2011
Journal Compilation © CSIRO Publishing 2011 Open Access CC BY-NC-ND
Abstract
Lifetimewool was a national project that began in 2001 to develop profitable ewe feeding and management guidelines for wool producers across southern Australia. By 2005, the project included communication and adoption activities. Rigorous communication, adoption and evaluation plans were used to maintain focus on its objectives and to measure impacts. Evaluation was an integral part of the project’s development and allowed the project to gain a clear idea of its impact. The project aimed to influence at least 3000 producers nationally to change the management of their ewe flock by the adoption (or part thereof) of Lifetimewool messages and guidelines. More specifically, the project aimed to ‘cross the chasm’ and target producers that were deemed to be in the ‘early adopter’ and the ‘early majority’ segments. The project surveyed sheep producers, sheep industry consultants and sheep industry extension practitioners at the beginning and end of the project to gauge the change in knowledge, attitudes, skills and aspirations of wool producers over the life of the project. Results from the survey of sheep producers in 2008 indicate that the project achieved its aim. About 12% (~3000) of sheep producers nationally have changed practice due to information received from Lifetimewool since 2005. Many other producers have been affected through their increase in knowledge, belief and skills, and market segmentation of the audience shows that the project was successful in ‘crossing the chasm’. The strategies employed by the project to initiate change (i.e. using private consultants and extension professionals as a pathway to adoption, and involving producers, consultants and extension professionals in the development of the Lifetimewool key messages and tools) were validated. The survey results and analysis provided baseline data for future livestock management projects to build on producers’ progress towards practice change. The present paper looks at how the Lifetimewool’s evaluation plan provided a focus for and demonstrated meeting its objectives. In doing so, this paper also seeks to better understand the adoption process.
References
Barnett R (2007) ‘Best practice pasture utilisation and natural resource management – A review of current extension and adoption.’ Ref B.COM.0112.2. (Meat and Livestock Australia: Sydney)Bennett C (1975) Up the hierarchy. Journal of Extension 13, 7–12.
Curnow M, Thompson A (2008) Communication and adoption plan 2008–2010. Available at http://www.sheepcrc.com.au [Verified 30 November 2008]
Curnow M, Oldham CM, Behrendt R, Gordon DJ, Hyder MW, Rose IJ, Whale JW, Young JM, Thompson AN (2011) Successful adoption of new guidelines for the nutritional management of ewes is dependent on the development of appropriate tools and information. Animal Production Science 51, 851–856.
| Successful adoption of new guidelines for the nutritional management of ewes is dependent on the development of appropriate tools and information.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Curtis K (2005) Wool desk report: September 2005. Available at http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/objtwr/imported_assets/content/aap/sl/wool/200509_wdr06.pdf [Verified 10 January 2011]
Curtis K (2007a) Wool desk report: March 2007. Producer opinions on productivity and profitability. Available at http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/objtwr/imported_assets/content/aap/sl/wool/200703_wdr07.pdf [Verified 10 January 2011]
Curtis K (2007b) Wool desk report: May 2007. Flock demographics and producer intentions – results of a national survey conducted in February 2007. Available at http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/objtwr/imported_assets/content/aap/sl/wool/200705_wdr08.pdf [Verified 10 January 2011]
Curtis K (2009a) Wool desk report – February 2009. Times of lambing in Australian flocks – 2005 to 2007. Available at http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/objtwr/imported_assets/content/aap/sl/wool/wool_desk_report_no.10.pdf[Verified 10 January 2011]
Curtis K (2009b) Wool desk report – June 2009. Flock demographics and producer intentions— February 2009 national survey results. Available at http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/objtwr/imported_assets/content/aap/sl/wool/wdr011a.pdf[Verified 10 January 2011]
Curtis K (2009c) Wool desk report – September 2009. Changes in the Australian sheep industry. Available at http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/objtwr/imported_assets/content/aap/sl/wool/12%20changes%20in%20aust%20flock.wdr012.pdf[Verified 10 January 2011]
Dart J, McGarry P (2006) People-centred evaluation. In ‘Evaluation in emerging areas: proceedings of the Australasian Evaluation Society international conference 2006’, Lyneham, ACT, Australia. Australasian Evaluation Society.
Dart JJ, Curnow M, Behrendt R, Kabore C, Oldham CM, Rose IJ, Thompson AN (2011) The national Lifetimewool project: a journey in evaluation. Animal Production Science 51, 842–850.
| The national Lifetimewool project: a journey in evaluation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gasson R, Errington A (1993) ‘The farm family business.’ (CAB International: Wallingford, UK)
Mayne J (1999) Addressing attribution through contribution analysis: using performance measures sensibly. Discussion paper. Office of the Auditor General of Canada, Ontario.
McKenzie-Mohr D (1999) ‘Fostering sustainable behaviour: an introduction to community-based social marketing.’ (New Society Publishers: Gabriola Island, BC, Canada)
Moore GA (2006) ‘Crossing the chasm; marketing and selling disruptive products to mainstream customers.’ Collins Business Essentials (Harper Collins: New York)
Patton MQ (1997) ‘Utilization focused evaluation.’ (Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA)
Rogers E (1983) ‘Diffusion of innovations.’ 3rd edn. (Free Press: New York)
Rose G, Kabore C, Dart J (2005) Lifetime Wool – Farmers’ attitudes affect their adoption of recommended ewe management. In ‘Sheep updates proceedings 2005, DAFWA’. (Ed. S Shaw) pp. 41–42. (DAFWA: Perth)
Rose G, van Burgel A (2006) ‘Lifetimewool – Methodology for market segmentation based on willingness to change questions in the 2005 survey of sheep producers.’ Available at http://www.lifetimewool.com.au/pdf/methodmarketsegmentation2006.pdf [Verified 13 January 2011].
Trompf JP, Gordon DJ, Behrendt R, Curnow M, Kildey LC, Thompson AN (2011) Participation in Lifetime Ewe Management results in changes in stocking rate, ewe management and reproductive performance on commercial farms. Animal Production Science 51, 866–872.
| Participation in Lifetime Ewe Management results in changes in stocking rate, ewe management and reproductive performance on commercial farms.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Young J, Thompson A (2008) Cost benefit analysis of Lifetimewool. Available at http://www.lifetimewool.com.au [Verified 30 November 2008]
