Ideas at Work

Ideas to Assist Extension Field Professionals in Building Linkages and Alliances

Introduction

The Cooperative Extension Service mission is well defined in its delivery function and has a long tradition of education. Tools and ideas that work to accomplish the Extension mission are desired by field personnel. Other educators, researchers, community leaders, residents, and decision makers do not always understand the broad role of Extension in the larger scope of land-grant institutions. Specifically, the role of Extension field personnel as educators, not advocates, has sometimes inhibited the collaboration process at the local level. Because of this, Extension field staff have sometimes been put in the precarious position of being asked to provide education about policy issues, while the hidden agenda of a group is for the Extension representative to advocate for a certain position.

At the same time, Extension agents have raised a recurring question about their various roles as educators. One of these roles is to build partnerships and coalitions related to community issues. In this case, the role of the Extension professional must be explicitly communicated to potential partners. The interrelationship of issues and the demand for educational programs have created a conducive environment for building strategic linkages and alliances.

Tools

Within the strategic plan of the Family and Consumer Sciences program of Ohio State University Extension, a team of county, district, and state professionals has developed a series of tools to assist Extension program personnel with partnership building, educational delivery, and strategic positioning. The tools help to facilitate building effective linkages and alliances, while not compromising Extension's role in delivering research-based, unbiased information.

Assets, needs, and emerging issues were identified at an early stage of the strategic planning process. The tools and resources were developed based on what Extension agents were currently doing and their needs for specific tools to help build partnerships. The premise was that field faculty and staff did not need any more items added to their schedule or work program, rather, they needed to be aware of how to work smarter with what they were already doing. The series of tools and resources included the following.

• Compilation of successful collaboration efforts: A survey was conducted with county, district, and state Family and Consumer Sciences program staff to assess partnerships and collaboration efforts. The survey identified 59 different agencies or organizations with which Family and Consumer Sciences personnel collaborated.

• Successful partnership articles: Local and state Family and Consumer Sciences program staff contributed newsletter articles of successful partnerships and collaborations. The articles were published in the electronic statewide Family and Consumer Sciences Extension newsletter. Between 1996 and 1998, 14 articles highlighting local collaborations appeared in the monthly newsletter.

• Linkages Challenge: The Linkages Challenge is an annual self-assessment of skills and techniques to encourage county, district, and state Family and Consumer Sciences program staff to build linkages and alliances in their communities. Completing the challenge is rewarded with recognition at the annual meeting and an incentive that contributes to building linkages in the community.

• Resource list for agents: A resource list of established materials (electronic, print, and video) was developed and distributed to all county and district Family and Consumer Sciences personnel. The list addresses facilitation skills, leadership resources, conflict utilization, public policy education, and issues education. The list is reviewed annually to ensure the most current information is included.

• Videoconference teaching: Six videoconference sites throughout the state were used to teach county, district, and state program staff about the potential role of Extension education in family policy issues. The videoconference used facilities operated by four public entities (The Ohio State University, Ohio University, Ohio Department of Administrative Services, and Ohio Department of Human Services). None of these sites had been linked in this manner previously, nor had any of these entities contacted each other for cooperative videoconferencing.

• Internal and external grant resources: Internal and external grant resources were sought and used specifically to enhance teaching program personnel through innovative means such as videoconference, teleconference, and Internet. Modeling education delivery using various technologies was essential to broaden the skills of educators.

• Coalition Guide: Every county Family and Consumer Sciences agent was provided established materials on coalition building. These materials included strategies to avoid the perception of advocacy and to focus on the defined mission of educational delivery.

Each of these tools and resources was used and incorporated into the overall Extension Family and Consumer Sciences program as a means to encourage partnership building. Evaluation of each strategy was dependent upon the goals and objectives. While not all techniques were initially successful, each effort was evaluated based on innovativeness and use of emerging technology. For example, the videoconference used university facilities, an investment few knew how to use. Of the 33 respondents, 61% indicated that videoconferencing has high potential for application in Extension teaching and learning.

Conclusion

Providing specific skills and defining Extension's role in partnerships have been essential to helping Extension personnel fulfill their mission of providing unbiased education, yet be engaged within the community as a contributing partner. Fifty-eight percent of Family and Consumer Sciences Agents identified the Building Coalitions Fact Sheets as a tool that assisted them to be effective members of these partnerships.

Providing Ohio Family and Consumer Sciences Extension professionals with resources and tools to help build linkages and alliances has given those professionals a better understanding of their role within the overall mission of Extension. County agents and their community partners have recognized that Extension is not "everything to everyone," rather Extension has a specific mission, purpose, and function. This well-defined mission and purpose are the strongest asset that Extension brings to a partnership.

Developing the New York City Watershed Model Forests: Working Laboratories to Study and Demonstrate Sustainable Forestry

Introduction

New York City's water supply system is one of the largest surface storage and supply systems in the world, supplying high-quality drinking water to nearly nine million consumers representing nearly half of New York State's total population. More than 75% of the nearly 2,000 square mile total watershed is forested, with the majority of these lands privately owned.

The watershed forests exemplify the urban-rural interface; not only are they considered a preferred open space land use for water quality protection, but they also represent a working landscape that supports a viable local economy. For this reason, New York City supports a voluntary, locally based Watershed Forestry Program that includes forest management planning and implementation, logger training, education and outreach, research and demonstration, and economic development.

This article describes how the integration of scientific research, continuing education, and public outreach at the New York City (NYC) Watershed Model Forests presents an ideal opportunity for developing, monitoring, and demonstrating the principles of sustainable forestry in the context of a large-scale working landscape over broad temporal terms.

Background–Model Forests

The Model Forests began development in the fall of 1997 as the primary research and demonstration component of the Watershed Forestry Program. The Model Forests encompass four sites distributed throughout the City's water supply watersheds and representing a variety of landownerships.

1. Lennox Memorial Forest (70 acres), owned and managed by Cornell Cooperative Extension of Delaware County, is located in the Cannonsville Reservoir watershed.

2. Frost Valley Model Forest (240 acres), owned and managed by the Frost Valley YMCA, is located in the Neversink Reservoir watershed.

3. Mink Hollow Model Forest (250 acres), owned and managed by the NYC Department of Environmental Protection, is located in the Ashokan Reservoir watershed.

4. Ninham Mountain Model Forest (150 acres), owned and managed by the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, is located in the West Branch Reservoir watershed.

The Lennox Memorial Forest was the first site to be developed, with construction scheduled for completion during the spring of 2001. The Frost Valley site has been designed and developed, with construction planned to begin during summer 2001. The Mink Hollow and Ninham Mountain sites are currently being designed, but construction is not planned until 2002.

Long-Term Forest Monitoring

Each Model Forest is being delineated into a series of experimental treatment blocks ranging in size from 5 to 50 acres, determined through the use of maps, aerial photos, and forest inventory. The treatment blocks are inventoried based on a 10% sample (by area) using 1/24-acre permanent fixed area plots. This Continuous Forest Inventory (CFI) design is based on the USDA Forest Service multi-resource Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) system, which incorporates measurements of mensuration, diameter-at-breast height (DBH), total heights, crown ratio and position, damage indicators, pest/disease information, and other baseline data.

When fully installed, each treatment block will be used to assess and demonstrate various silvicultural prescriptions and thinning regimes values (i.e., shelterwood, clearcut, seed tree, patchcut, timber stand improvement) used for long-term forest management. In this capacity, the Model Forests will serve as research and demonstration sites for documenting and interpreting pre- and post-harvest conditions for timber production, wildlife habitat, recreation, aesthetics, and other values, while assessing the degree of natural regeneration in comparison to control areas without manipulations.

Research

Long-term research focusing on the relationship between forest management and water quality is a priority of the Model Forests. Of particular interest is the role that both managed and unmanaged forests play regarding soil and water quality, nutrient cycling, and other biogeochemical processes. Additional research currently under way is linked to important indicator species of ecosystem health. Such species customarily have intimate ties to air, soil, and water quality, thereby offering an opportunity to monitor ecosystem changes by observing changes in species diversity, abundance, and distribution.

Funding for research on the Model Forests is coming from a variety of sources, including the New York City Department of Environmental Protection, Watershed Forestry Program, New York Center for Forestry Research and Development, USDA Forest Service, and the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service.

Demonstrating Best Management Practices

In order to demonstrate forest management techniques that are compatible with watershed protection, the Model Forests will emphasize practical and effective Best Management Practices (BMPs), including traditional and innovative technologies (e.g., water bars, broad-based dips, portable bridges, geotextile fabric, open-topped culverts, etc.). Particular attention is devoted to reducing or eliminating soil erosion and stream sedimentation during the construction and maintenance of forest access roads, skid trails, log landings, and stream crossings. The access system for each model forest will address combinations of three major parameters that define the sensitivity of a given site to forest management and determine BMP effectiveness: soil type, slope, and the size and location of the site within the watershed.

Education and Outreach

Interpreting the importance of a working landscape is another integral component of the Model Forests. To facilitate public outreach, each Model Forest is linked to an environmental education center to promote and demonstrate sustainable forestry throughout the year.

In addition, interpretive signs and photo points are being situated throughout the Model Forests to describe specific management techniques within each treatment block and to serve as points of discussion and environmental education for all audiences, including youth. Because each Model Forest will be managed as a working landscape, the signs will be removed during harvesting operations and reinstalled thereafter. Furthermore, educational scripts targeting specific audiences are under development to compliment the interpretive signs and support group tours, workshops, and site visits.

A Work in Progress

Development of the NYC Watershed Model Forests is progressing in a deliberate manner, given the multiple objectives of research, demonstration, public outreach, and continuing education. The NYC Watershed is a high-profile example of the urban-rural interface at work, and the sociopolitical and institutional conflicts that exist are not unique.

World wide, large cities and local communities are striving to balance environmental quality and protection with economic development and long-term prosperity. We believe that each of the four Model Forests will offer a practical and valuable opportunity for demonstrating how this balance can be maintained while monitoring the effects of forest management on ecosystem functions and water quality.

Of particular significance is the role of the Model Forests regarding the future management of the surrounding working landscape. As a long-term institutional resource, each Model Forests will provide unprecedented opportunities for private landowners, forest industry, environmental groups and others audiences to better understand the multiple values associated with their local natural resources.

As these audiences become well-informed stewards of the watershed forests, it is hoped that they will recognize and fulfill their responsibility to contribute to a thriving working landscape and to help improve the quality of their natural environment.

For Further Information

Readers wishing to learn more about the New York City Watershed Model Forest Program should contact René Germain, Chair of the Watershed Model Forest Program, at: http://www.esf.edu /course/rhgermain/home.htm, or Brian Fisher, Director of the Watershed Forestry Program, at: http://www.nycwatershed. org/forest.htm

Developing a Simple Four-Step Marketing Plan for Extension Programs

Would you like to improve the public's awareness of your Extension program? Would you like to have more people attend your meetings? If the answer to either of these questions is "yes," then what you need to do is create a marketing program designed to inform and motivate the audience you wish to reach. A marketing effort is designed to change the audience's knowledge, attitude, or behavior as it relates to your program.

How? Where would you start?

Step One: Conduct an Audience Inventory

Conducting an audience inventory (Entine & Ziffern, 1980) will help you determine which media you will use and how you will conduct your campaign. Break your audience into components because each will have to be treated differently. For instance, if you wanted to reach older people, how would you do it? Would you use mass media? Would you do it in the middle of the day because they go to bed early? What do older people have in common? To find this out you have to break the audience down by something other than demographics. "Psychographics" (Berkowitz, Kerin, & Rudelius, 1994) is the term used for grouping people by psychological tendencies–what they need, what they like, and how they live.

After you have divided your population into groups, list answers to the following questions next to each group on a big piece of paper.

• What does this subgroup know about Extension?
• How do they feel about Extension?
• What they are currently doing that is related to Extension?

To learn more, you could use the following audience analysis techniques.

• Focus group research entails small-group interviewing among persons who presumably represent characteristics of the target audience segment or segments (Wimmer & Dominick, 1994).

• Survey research uses questionnaires to interview large numbers of persons who usually are selected at random, using scientific probability sampling methods. When a sample is done correctly, these persons are perfectly representative of the population in general. That is, if 10% of the population is over 60 years of age, 10% of the sample will be over 60 years of age. Because individuals in a randomly selected sample have the same characteristics as the general population, their attitudes and opinions reflect the attitudes and opinions of the targetaudience perfectly. Survey research lets you know a little bit about many different people.

Step Two: Define Your Goals and Specify Your Objectives

After you have determined what your audience wants, you should develop goals and objectives to meet those needs: a goal is a broad statement of your intentions, an objective is specific and measurable (McElreath, 1997). A goal would be something like "increasing public awareness." An objective would be "increase public recognition of the county logo by 5%." Then, when you do a survey and 5% more people recognize your logo, you know that you have met your first objective.

Why have objectives and goals? Because without them there is no REAL progress. You can produce a lot of messages and get them transmitted by the various media, but until you specify your objectives, you aren't likely to achieve specific results. To develop goals and objectives, review your audience analysis and conduct some type of strategic analysis.

An easy-to-do, but still useful, strategy for developing goals and objectives is the SWOT analysis. This approach allows a group or organization to pull its people together and have all of them make up a list of the organizations ten greatest strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats from competitors. Then, the total group reviews and analyzes each person's list, and the group then makes up a new list–a unanimously agreed-on list–of the organization's 10 strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. A SWOT analysis can be done by the directors of the organization, or it can be done by the people in one part of the organization.

For instance in an Extension office, the review can be done by just the Extension director and the faculty agents. Or a single program can do it by completing the SWOT analysis with the participating agents, their advisory group, and possibly some of their leaders or volunteers.

Once the four lists are completed, the participants should discuss each of the elements, reorganize the list for priority (most important is number one, second most important is number two, and so forth), and reduce the list to seven elements. The final and most important part of the analysis is to plan to use the strengths to offset the weaknesses, and the opportunities to weaken the threats. When you do this, you create problem/solution statements that become your goals.

Step Three: Decide on the Nature of Your Message

Once you have analyzed your audience to determine what you should say, and once you have decided on your goals and objectives to determine what you do that would attract this specific audience, you have to decide what your message should contain (Seiden, 1990). What is it you want them to do, and what would the audience find persuasive?

To answer these questions, you should review your audience analysis and your goals and objectives. After you have reviewed this information, you should do a message inventory to determine the "nature" of your message. To conduct a message inventory for your subject matter, you should analyze your intended message by the following criteria so that it has the impact to change their attitudes. Four factors affect the length or design of your message.

Complexity

How complex will your message be? The more complex the subject, the more detail you will have to use in each of your messages and the more you need to use different messages for each audience subgroup. In each case, the audience subgroup will be willing to listen to, and be capable of understanding, only one specific message.

Duration

How long will it take you to reach and persuade your audience? Some messages are simple enough that the audience can understand them and immediately begin to change their behavior. Other messages will require a longer learning period.

For instance, take reducing trash to save your town money on waste control and collection. You could probably get people to start crushing aluminum cans in just a few months. But what about convincing them to switch to products that have less paper and plastic wrapping?

Uniqueness

Messages that stand out from the others are more recognizable and, therefore, more effective. If you can separate your message from other messages, it will be more memorable, and you will have to send fewer messages.

In advertising they say that if your program is unique you should stress its uniqueness (Roman, 1976). If your program is not unique (the community college or other government agencies carry similar information), you should find some aspect of it that is unique and make this the main theme of your message.

Appeal

Should they already want to do it? For instance, if your message is about recycling, don't they already want to save money? Sure, and they already hate to take out a big pile of trash, too. And they also want to help preserve the environment. Take advantage of the things that they already believe in. Give them specific, detailed messages that they can relate to their needs without having to change too many of their opinions or behaviors. Stress what you know they will find appealing.

Step Four: Decide on the Appropriate Media

Which media should you use to convey your carefully constructed messages to the specific audience subgroup you have decided to reach? The only way to be sure is to conduct an audience analysis. Use the media that works with that targeted subgroup of the population.

If your audience is large and widely dispersed, you could use mass media. However, remember that mass media has little impact other than to make people aware.

If your audience is small and centrally located, you could use direct mail or telephone calls (cheaper AND more personal).

If your audience tends to be very private, don't use direct mail or telephone contact with them–it won't work. Within your audience are people who are influential in the lives of others. Reach them first. How do you reach them? They use different media from the others, so use a focus group, and find out which media they use. Then, use that media to start your campaign (Simmons, 1990).

Summary

To develop an effective marketing plan you must match the needs of the various audience subgroups with the attributes of whatever you are trying to promote. We are all familiar with the benefits of advertising, but advertising is only part of a promotional plan.

The idea behind marketing is to lead the consumer through the four stages that lead to purchase:

• Awareness,
• Interest,
• Knowledge, and
• Behavior.

To successfully do this, you must:

1. Conduct an audience inventory,
2. Define your goals and specify your objectives,
3. Decide on the nature of your message, and
4. Decide on the appropriate media.

References

Berkowitz, E. N., Kerin, R. A., Hartley, S. W., & Rudelius, W. (1994). Marketing (4th ed.). Illinois:Irwin.

Entine, L., & Ziffern, A. (1980). Getting the word out. A handbook for planning a public information campaign. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin-Extension.

McElreath, M. P. (1997). Managing systematic and ethical public relations campaigns (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Roman, K. (1976). How to advertise. New York: St. Martin's Press

Seiden, H. (1990). Advertising pure and simple. New York: AMACOM

Simmons, R. E. (1990). Communication campaign management. New York: Longman.

Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (1994). Mass media research an introduction. (4th ed.). California: Wadsworth.

Charting a Course Through the Culture Storms: A Cautionary Tale

There is a persistent backlash against multiculturalism in a nation that is becoming more diverse every day. By 2020, California, will be 42% Hispanic, 18% Asian, and 33% White Non-Hispanic (State of California, 1998). Even while multiculturalism is being hotly debated, diversity-training programs proliferate. These have become a full-fledged national industry with an emerging sub-industry devoted to clearing up the mess left behind by previous diversity trainers.

In this current cultural climate, even the terminology is politicized and polarized. Images and slogans replace reasoned discourse and travel at the speed of television sound bites and Internet postings.

Diversity almost always guarantees complexity, which, in turn, can lead to conflict. For the diversity program planner, there is little empirical data to guide program development. Research as to program quality or efficacy is in its infancy. What with the current climate of controversy around diversity, the lack of standards for objectives and content of diversity training programs, and the meager research base available, "why go there?" becomes a fair question.

Expressed training needs and an explicit mission statement are two answers to this question. As part of a regional team of 4-H youth development advisors at the University of California, we conducted an educational training needs survey of youth-serving agencies in our communities. Diversity training was the need most often cited.

In addition, the 4-H program in California has stated as its mission the creation of supportive environments in which culturally diverse youth and adults can reach their fullest potential. Thus, we are always seeking to provide fresh and meaningful approaches to help give youth the intellectual and cultural resources crucial for success in the multicultural national and global societies they will help form. Robert Hughes (1993) has reminded us that "the future belongs to those who can think and act with informed grace across ethnic, cultural, linguistic lines. In the world that is coming, if you can't navigate difference, you have had it."

Reframing the Conversation

This project began with our commitment and the expressed training needs of the youth-service providers we had surveyed. Next, we polled a sample of our target audiences to find out both the breadth and depth of their previous diversity training experiences.

The adults, of mixed age, occupation, race, and ethnicity, all reported some previous training. All saw intercultural communication skills as important, but their own training experiences as inadequate. Typical descriptors were "prescriptive," "mundane," "criminally low brow," "stressful," and "divisive."

The youth in our sample have all benefited from the school-based multicultural education as mandated by California's Curriculum Guidelines. Although the youth are quite comfortable with the terminology around diversity, their communication skills remain shallow, and their understanding seldom goes beyond food, festivals, and heroes.

We then developed an interactive and innovative diversity-training workshop, which we piloted and field-tested throughout California. The specific outcomes we seek are:

• An understanding of the recent research around intercultural communication,

• An awareness of how our American cultural assumptions drive our behaviors and how they affect other people, and

• A rough plan for improving the intercultural encounters in our own lives.

Describing the Workshop

The first activity in the workshop is a cooperative learning exercise designed to present recent research. Included are Bennett's (1986) developmental stage theory, Gardenswartz and Rowe's (1998) comparison matrix, and Wardel's (1996) anti-bias and ecological model. Bennett's theory posits a continuum of increasing sophistication in dealing with cultural differences, from denial to integration. Gardenswartz and Rowe's matrix compares affirmative action, valuing differences, and managing diversity. Wardel's anti-bias and ecological model emphasizes the tremendous variations to be found in specific cultural groups. In this model the focus is on the individual as a product of important factors, including but not limited to culture.

Next is a problem-solving activity for small groups, which focuses on our American cultural assumptions, their underlying values, and possible intercultural impact. To increase our awareness of cultural difference, we begin with our shared American experience. By explicitly focusing on American culture to increase awareness of different cultures, we are implicitly underlying our similarities. When we increase the interest in and knowledge of global viewpoints, we are at the same time increasing the awareness and knowledge of local cultural variations.

An exercise in cross-cultural dialogues follows. These are short conversations between speakers from two different cultures, and they illustrate a particular cultural difference. The small group's task is to study the dialogue, to try to identify what that difference is, to reenact the cross-cultural encounter for the group, and then to facilitate the interpretation.

In the final activity, the participants write a rough plan for improving their own intercultural encounters. These activities provide opportunities to apply knowledge to concrete situations.

Considering the Results

The workshop evaluations have been very positive. Our own retrospective pre/post tests and independent evaluations attest to the success of this model. We attribute the enthusiastic response we have received to the following.

• This model is based on sound adult learning theory, which articulates a safe learning environment, active learner participation, and intellectual challenge.

• The approach is positive. The emphasis is upon capabilities rather than deficits. The implication is that we can control how we see the world.

• Our common American cultural behaviors provide the framework in which we explore cultural difference.

• This model offers an ecological rather than a reductionist definition of culture. Each individual is not simply a product of but instead uniquely acts upon a given culture.

We have found that our global model not only is nonthreatening, but also raises the level of the conversation on this important subject of cultural diversity. We have reframed the conversation to emphasize enlightened self-interest, recognizing that our well-being and that of others are interdependent and intertwined. As trainers, we know we must continuously endeavor to walk that fine line between creating a comfortable climate and still injecting scholarship and challenge.

References

Bennett, M. J. (1986). A developmental approach to training intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(2), 179-196.

Gardenswartz, L., & Rowe, A. (1998). Managing diversity: A complete desk reference and planning guide. New York: McGraw Hill.

Hughes, R. (1993). Culture of complaint: The fraying of America. New York: Oxford University Press.

State of California (1998). Race/ethnic population with age and sex detail, 1970-2040. Department of Finance. Available: http://www.dof.ca. gov/html/Demograp/Race.htm.

Wardle, F. (1996). Proposal: An anti-bias and ecological model for multicultural education. Childhood Educator. Spring 1996, 152-156.

Gap Analysis: A Tool for Community Economic Development

Introduction

The Cooperative Extension Service has had a significant role in assisting local economic development efforts (Conglose, 2000). Often, that role includes data analysis, technical studies, or surveys that provide information to enhance the local quality of life (Guy & Rogers, 1999). A key segment of local economics includes Main Street businesses and local retail trade activity.

In recent years, organizations such as Main Street have played an important role in educating local citizens in issues of retail competitiveness, specifically, and in issues of economic development, in general. As a result, the nation's small cities and towns have placed a renewed emphasis on economic development through the retention of local retail dollars. This new emphasis has created a need for reliable retail data and educated analysis within these communities (Barta & Woods, 1999).

The Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service has responded to this need by offering a Retail Trends and Taxable Sales Analysis to communities that request it. The "gap analysis report," as it has come to be called, has been well received by community leaders in Oklahoma. Accompanying the written report is a Power Point presentation that uses color graphics. Often the report and presentation are e-mailed from campus-based research staff to Extension professionals in the field who present the report to the community. An example of a written report, conducted for Stroud, OK (Moore et al., 1999) may be viewed at the followed Web address: http://www.agecon.okstate.edu/community/CommunityAssessment.htm#C.

From June 1, 1999 to June 1, 2000, the gap analysis was conducted for 15 communities in 12 counties of Oklahoma. The communities represented a population of 172,890 and total retail sales of $1.98 billion for fiscal year 1999. This article explains the gap analysis report (Barta & Woods, 1999) and describes the impact of the report on the communities that have used it. To determine the local impact, a survey was sent to each County Extension Director who was involved with one of these reports. In some cases, the director also forwarded a copy of the survey to community partners who were involved with the study.

Gap Analysis

Gap analysis begins with the calculation of trade area capture (TAC). TAC estimates the number of people who have shopped in a local economy over a 1-year period. This is accomplished by dividing the retail sales of a community by the average per capita retail spending by Oklahoma residents. The result is an estimate of the number of people who have spent the state average within the community.

Unfortunately, TAC cannot be compared across communities. Consider a town of 2,000 people that attracted 4,000 shoppers to their economy last year. This town has been successful at capturing local shoppers plus attracting non-local shoppers. Compare that town to a city with a population of 8,000. If this city had only attracted 4,000 shoppers last year, then it was only successful in capturing half of the local market and had not attracted any non-local shoppers.

In order to measure the "pull" of a local economy in a way that can be compared across communities, the TAC is used to calculate an index referred to as a "pull factor" (PF). The PF for a community is found by dividing the town's TAC by the town's population. For example, the town of 2,000 with a trade area of 4,000 has a pull factor of 2.0. The city of 8,000 with a trade area of 4,000 has a pull factor of 0.50.

In general, a PF that is greater than 1.0 indicates that a community is capturing the local market plus attracting non-local shoppers. A PF that is less than 1.0 indicates that a community is failing to capture the trade of its own local population. The database used in Oklahoma allows for both tabular and graphic presentation over a 20-year time period.

Gap analysis takes pull factor analysis one step further by evaluating trade area capture and estimating pull factors for specific retail categories. For instance, the eight Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) categories that are considered retail are:

• Building Materials and Hardware,
• General Merchandise,
• Food Stores,
• Gasoline and Auto Parts,
• Apparel,
• Furniture and Home Furnishings,
• Food and Drink, and
• Miscellaneous Retail.

When estimates of retail spending by SIC category are available at the community level, TAC and PF can be calculated by category. Thus, a community may have a sales "gap" in the market for apparel (PF < 1.0), but may have a sales "surplus" in the food store category (PF > 1.0).

The value associated with sales gap analysis comes from knowing the strengths and weaknesses of the local retail economy. It is a first step. Local residents must decide for themselves whether a retail gap is not acceptable, acceptable, or even preferable. If it is deemed not acceptable, then community leaders should work to devise a competitive strategy for meeting the needs of the community.

Evaluation and Conclusions

In order to determine the value of the gap analysis to communities, a survey was mailed to each of 12 County Extension Directors. In some cases, the directors forwarded a copy of the survey to community partners who may have originally requested the report. Ten unique communities responded to the survey, and a total of 14 completed surveys were received. Four communities returned surveys from both the county Extension educator and a community partner.

Overwhelmingly, the response by communities for the retail trends report was positive. The most optimistic responses, however, appeared to come from communities that already had a mechanism in place for accepting, studying, and disseminating the data. For example, the Economic Restructuring Committee of Stillwater Main Street immediately began to use the information to promote a shop downtown first attitude, and the Chickasha Chamber of Commerce set up a special committee designed to analyze and use the data.

Other communities indicated they used the report to enhance community focus on the needs and opportunities of downtown revitalization. A common response of communities was "at the minimum, the report has altered the perception of retail spending and leakage."

A key lesson learned has been to work closely with the local community leaders and economic development professionals. Usually, a draft report is reviewed by a local steering committee. This allows Extension professionals to answer any questions and clarify interpretation. Often, unique data trends are identified and assessed during this initial phase.

The reports have led to additional requests for assistance through the Extension Service. Consumer shopping surveys, business management training, and customer service/hospitality training are examples of additional programs that have been provided. Extension has much to offer in the area of sustainable community development. Gap analysis has proven to be an effective tool that builds on the strength of Extension's research-based program efforts.

References

Barta, S. D., & Woods, M.D. (1999). Gap analysis as a tool for community economic development. Oklahoma State University Extension Facts [On-line]. WF-917. Available: http://agweb.okstate.edu/pearl/agecon/resource/wf-917.pdf

Conglose, J. B. (2000). The cooperative extension service's role in running a successful county economic development program. Journal of Extension [On-line]. 38(3). Available: http://www.joe.org/joe/2000june/a3.html

Guy, S. M., & Rogers, D. L. (1999). Community surveys: Measuring citizen's attitudes toward sustainability. Journal of Extension [On-line] .37 (3). Available: http://www.joe.org/joe/1999june/a2.html

Moore, M., Barta, S. D., Jones, M., Frye, J., & Woods, M. D. (1999). Analysis of retail trends and taxable sales analysis for Stroud, OK and Lincoln County. Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service [On-line]. AE-9966. Available: http://www.agecon.okstate.edu/community/Stroud%20for%20Web.pdf

Tomato IPM Field Demonstrations in Alabama

Introduction

Fresh market tomatoes are an important crop in Alabama, with an estimated annual value of $18 million. Several plant diseases and insect pests significantly affect tomato production in the state. Attempts by growers to control these pest often result in the heavy use of pesticides. One way for growers to reduce pesticide usage while maintaining profitability is to incorporate Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies into their production program. IPM emphasizes preventative methods that provide economical, long-term solutions to pest problems while minimizing hazards to human health and to the environment.

In 1996, a survey was conducted to determine the levels of adoption of tomato IPM in the Southeast (Bauske, Zehnder, Sikora, & Kemble, 1998). The results of this survey indicated that 65% of Alabama growers and 66% of Alabama acreage were in the medium and high IPM use categories. However, none of the growers surveyed employed a scouting service, and most had not been trained in pest scouting. In addition, none of the respondents had used TOMCAST, a weather-timed fungicide spray program that was shown previously to be effective and economical for use on fresh-market tomatoes in Alabama (Sikora, Bauske, & Pitts, 1994a; Sikora, Bauske, Zehnder, & Hollingsworth, 1994b).

Alabama growers were interested in adopting insect and disease scouting and the TOMCAST program. However, they expressed concern about the physical and economic constraints of applying fungicides and insecticides independently on an "as needed" basis and questioned if there would be a financial gain associated with the extra work. To address these issues, the Alabama Tomato IPM Program was compared with conventional pest management practices in on-farm demonstrations in 1997 and 1998. The program was funded by the USDA Southern Region IPM Program.

Field Demonstrations

Demonstrations were conducted in Geneva County, Alabama. Seven growers participated in the 2-year study. Each grower set aside a 1-acre tomato field for the purpose of comparing the IPM program with their conventional pest management practices. On half of the field, each grower followed his conventional pest management program (conventional field section), whereas on the other half (IPM field section), the grower followed the IPM program designed by Auburn University. The IPM program consisted of a twice-a-week insect/disease scouting program combined with TOMCAST.

In the conventional field sections, growers typically applied the insecticides dimethoate and esfenvalerate for thrips and fruitworm control, respectively, weekly throughout the season. The insecticides were usually mixed with a fungicide such as chlorothalonil or mancozeb for control of foliar blight diseases.

The Auburn University-trained scout visited the IPM field sections twice a week from transplanting through harvest. The scout examined 50 plants/field section for the presence of diseases and/or insect pests. A report was submitted to the grower after each scouting session detailing the occurrence of diseases and insect pests and providing a pesticide recommendation when necessary. Cooperators based their fungicide spray schedule on recommendations based on TOMCAST provided by AWIS Weather Services (Auburn, Alabama). During the season, the fungicide spray program was adjusted accordingly by the scout based on which diseases were observed in the field.

At the end of the season, the number of pesticide applications used in the conventional and IPM field sections were compared, and a budgetary economic analysis was performed. Actual expenses incurred for both systems were averaged across growers and years.

Results and Impacts

1. There was no difference in fruit production or fruit quality between the programs.
2. Growers saved $34.12/acre when using the IPM program; there was a 47% reduction in the cost of insecticides and a 27% reduction in the cost of fungicides.
3. Growers made four fewer insecticide applications with the IPM program, compared to their conventional program.
4. Growers averaged 4.8 applications of dimethoate for thrips control with the IPM program, in contrast to 9.7 applications in their conventional program.
5. Growers averaged 3.5 applications of esfenvalerate for fruitworm control, in contrast to 8.8 applications in their conventional program.
6. Growers averaged 8.8 fungicide applications with the IPM program, in contrast to 12.4 applications with the conventional program, and there were no differences in severity of foliar diseases between the programs.
7. Growers following the conventional program averaged 12.3 trips through the field to apply pesticides, while growers following the IPM program averaged 12.7 trips. The savings in pesticide costs using IPM offset the additional cost resulting from the extra trip through the field.
8. The cost of TOMCAST via AWIS would be $4.77/acre for a growing season for an averaged size farm (22 acres) in Alabama.
9. The cost of scouting tomatoes in Alabama will range from $25-45/acre per season.
10. The participating growers were enthusiastic about the IPM program and requested availability of this approach on an annual basis.

Summary

The goal of the project was to provide the growers of Alabama with a clear vision of the benefits of a tomato IPM program. Currently, there are no trained field scouts for tomatoes in Alabama, nor is there a tomato organization that could support such a service. The growers who cooperated in this project have asked a private cotton scouting company to add tomatoes to their scouting service. This scouting service will receive TOMCAST directly from AWIS via the Internet, resulting in improved timing of fungicide and insecticide applications and reduced costs to the grower.

References

Bauske, M., Zehnder, G. M., Sikora, E. J., & Kemble, J. (1998). Southeastern tomato growers adopt integrated pest management. HortTechnology 8: 40-44.

Sikora, E. J., Bauske, E. M., & Pitts, J. (1994a). Evaluation of fungicides using fixed and weather-timed spray schedules for early blight control of fresh market tomatoes. Fungicide and Nematicide Tests 49: 173.

Sikora, E. J., Bauske, E. M., Zehnder, G. W., & Hollingsworth, M. H. (1994b). Evaluation of low-input fungicide spray programs for control of early blight on tomatoes. Auburn University Agric. Exp. Sta. Highlights of Agricultural Research 41:15.

This article is online at http://joe.org/joe/2001april/ent-iw.html.

Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org.