美国西部葡萄园病虫害管理集体行动展望

Sarah R. Lowder, Michelle M. Moyer, Monica L. Cooper, Jay Pscheidt, Walter F. Mahaffee
{"title":"美国西部葡萄园病虫害管理集体行动展望","authors":"Sarah R. Lowder, Michelle M. Moyer, Monica L. Cooper, Jay Pscheidt, Walter F. Mahaffee","doi":"10.1094/phytofr-07-23-0082-r","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An individual grower’s response to pests and diseases in their vineyard can have consequences for an entire growing region. Collective action strategies can help align grower responses to achieve better regional disease control. Ways in which we identify, approach, and address manager opinions regarding cooperative management efforts influences the success of collective action strategies. A Q-method survey was conducted to investigate the adoption obstacles of wine grape growers to regionally collective actions for managing pests and diseases. Qualitative information from the western US (n = 17 participants) was used to generate 36 statements describing opinions on collective management action and general disease management. A second set of grape producers (n = 59) were asked to rank these statements relative to each other. Participants perceived that collective management action would be worth the extra associated time or costs. Four prominent archetypal perspectives arose from the Q-method analysis explaining 66% of the variance in expressed opinions. Archetypes were termed, “The Cooperators\" (14 of 59), “The Quasi-Individualists” (9 of 59), “The Mid-Level Pragmatists” (8 of 59), and “The Bottom-Line Focused” (5 of 59). These groups were split across the demographic information collected; archetypes explained more variation between responses than demographic information. Overall, participants were likely to agree that cooperation was important, but they were more concerned about their individual vineyard economic and crop health concerns. Thus, suggesting that if outreach professionals want to increase the likelihood of grape grower participate in collective pest management actions, they should emphasize the individual benefits of participation.","PeriodicalId":508090,"journal":{"name":"PhytoFrontiers™","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perspectives towards collective action for pest and disease management in vineyards in the western US\",\"authors\":\"Sarah R. Lowder, Michelle M. Moyer, Monica L. Cooper, Jay Pscheidt, Walter F. Mahaffee\",\"doi\":\"10.1094/phytofr-07-23-0082-r\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"An individual grower’s response to pests and diseases in their vineyard can have consequences for an entire growing region. Collective action strategies can help align grower responses to achieve better regional disease control. Ways in which we identify, approach, and address manager opinions regarding cooperative management efforts influences the success of collective action strategies. A Q-method survey was conducted to investigate the adoption obstacles of wine grape growers to regionally collective actions for managing pests and diseases. Qualitative information from the western US (n = 17 participants) was used to generate 36 statements describing opinions on collective management action and general disease management. A second set of grape producers (n = 59) were asked to rank these statements relative to each other. Participants perceived that collective management action would be worth the extra associated time or costs. Four prominent archetypal perspectives arose from the Q-method analysis explaining 66% of the variance in expressed opinions. Archetypes were termed, “The Cooperators\\\" (14 of 59), “The Quasi-Individualists” (9 of 59), “The Mid-Level Pragmatists” (8 of 59), and “The Bottom-Line Focused” (5 of 59). These groups were split across the demographic information collected; archetypes explained more variation between responses than demographic information. Overall, participants were likely to agree that cooperation was important, but they were more concerned about their individual vineyard economic and crop health concerns. Thus, suggesting that if outreach professionals want to increase the likelihood of grape grower participate in collective pest management actions, they should emphasize the individual benefits of participation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508090,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PhytoFrontiers™\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PhytoFrontiers™\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1094/phytofr-07-23-0082-r\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PhytoFrontiers™","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1094/phytofr-07-23-0082-r","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

单个种植者对葡萄园病虫害的应对措施可能会影响整个种植区。集体行动策略有助于调整种植者的应对措施,从而实现更好的区域病虫害控制。我们如何识别、接近和处理管理者对合作管理的意见,会影响集体行动策略的成功与否。为调查酿酒葡萄种植者采用区域性集体行动管理病虫害的障碍,我们开展了一项 Q 法调查。来自美国西部的定性信息(n = 17 名参与者)被用来生成 36 份陈述,描述对集体管理行动和一般病害管理的看法。第二组葡萄生产者(n = 59)被要求对这些陈述进行相对排序。参与者认为,集体管理行动值得付出额外的时间或成本。通过 Q 方法分析,得出了四个突出的原型观点,解释了 66% 的意见表达差异。这些原型被称为 "合作者"(59 人中有 14 人)、"准个人主义者"(59 人中有 9 人)、"中层实用主义者"(59 人中有 8 人)和 "注重底线者"(59 人中有 5 人)。这些组别在所收集的人口信息中各占一半;原型比人口信息更能解释不同回答之间的差异。总体而言,参与者可能同意合作很重要,但他们更关心各自葡萄园的经济和作物健康问题。因此,如果外联专业人员希望提高葡萄种植者参与集体病虫害管理行动的可能性,他们就应该强调参与的个人利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perspectives towards collective action for pest and disease management in vineyards in the western US
An individual grower’s response to pests and diseases in their vineyard can have consequences for an entire growing region. Collective action strategies can help align grower responses to achieve better regional disease control. Ways in which we identify, approach, and address manager opinions regarding cooperative management efforts influences the success of collective action strategies. A Q-method survey was conducted to investigate the adoption obstacles of wine grape growers to regionally collective actions for managing pests and diseases. Qualitative information from the western US (n = 17 participants) was used to generate 36 statements describing opinions on collective management action and general disease management. A second set of grape producers (n = 59) were asked to rank these statements relative to each other. Participants perceived that collective management action would be worth the extra associated time or costs. Four prominent archetypal perspectives arose from the Q-method analysis explaining 66% of the variance in expressed opinions. Archetypes were termed, “The Cooperators" (14 of 59), “The Quasi-Individualists” (9 of 59), “The Mid-Level Pragmatists” (8 of 59), and “The Bottom-Line Focused” (5 of 59). These groups were split across the demographic information collected; archetypes explained more variation between responses than demographic information. Overall, participants were likely to agree that cooperation was important, but they were more concerned about their individual vineyard economic and crop health concerns. Thus, suggesting that if outreach professionals want to increase the likelihood of grape grower participate in collective pest management actions, they should emphasize the individual benefits of participation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信