Effectiveness of best practice management guides for improving invasive species management: a review

Best practice management (BPM) guides are a key component of invasive species extension in Australia, and are becoming a more important way of reaching land managers with comprehensive invasive species management strategies. However, little is known about the quantifiable benefits of these guides as a stand-alone extension approach, or in comparison with other approaches. We therefore reviewed the existing literature to determine when this form of extension was appropriate, what determines the success or failure of BPM guides in facilitating best practice invasive species management, how effective they had been in the Australian context, and what methods were available to evaluate BPM guide effectiveness. BPM guides are most appropriately used in support of other forms of extension and enforcement of invasive species regulations; as a cost-effective alternative to more labour-intensive extension techniques; or in bringing together disparate information in a single comprehensive source for land managers and extension practitioners. They appear to be most appropriately distributed at mid- and late-stages of the invasion curve. Limited quantitative evidence of the effectiveness of BPM guides for invasive species in Australia is available, although there is a consensus that these materials are popular among target audiences, despite a range of studies having shown face-to-face extension to be more effective. Unfortunately, many factors make successful evaluation of a BPM guide difficult, such that extension professionals are less likely to consider the possibility of evaluation. However, we argue that extension professionals need to consider evaluation of written BPM guides, where time and funding makes this possible. Ideally this will involve formative evaluation to improve the content and messages of the guide, as well as summative evaluation to determine its effectiveness among the target audience and for the target species. We also suggest a range of economic evaluation possibilities that warrant further exploration and trial.

Evaluation of the impact of Lifetimewool on sheep producers

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.

Successful adoption of new guidelines for the nutritional management of ewes is dependent on the development of appropriate tools and information

Low rates of adoption of innovations in sheep management have been blamed on the poor targeting of messages, low relative advantage of the innovation, a focus on awareness-raising activities rather than adoption activities, poor ‘packaging’ of information and few effective tools to aid decision making. Lifetimewool, a national project that developed management guidelines for Merino ewes specific to regions and different times of lambing, used a ‘review and improve’ process to identify areas of interest, level of knowledge and the skills required by different sectors of the audience to adopt the new recommendations for ewe management. To match these needs and to effectively communicate information from Lifetimewool, a combination of simple and complex tools were produced which were practical, effective, regionally specific and credible. All of the products were designed as a ‘family’ in terms of design and content, allowing a recognition by the producer that they complemented each other and led producers through logical steps for making decisions on managing and feeding ewes. The average awareness of all tools by consultants and extensionists was almost 90% and average usage rates were above 50%. However, the usage rates varied dramatically between tools and users, for example, 46% of consultants used the feed budget tables compared with 76% of extensionists for a similar awareness. Of 1353 producers surveyed more than 55% were aware of the Lifetimewool tools and average usage within this group was 19% and related to the length of time the tool had been available. An estimated 14 000 producers were aware of tools produced by Lifetimewool. The uptake and use of these tools by the target audiences support our hypothesis that tools of differing complexities are required to cater for individual needs.