Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T08:02:31.757Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using focus groups to assess almond growers' plant nutrition information needs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2010

Sara E. Lopus ,
Cary J. Trexler ,
James I. Grieshop  and
Patrick H. Brown
Sara E. Lopus*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of California, California, USA.
Cary J. Trexler
Affiliation:
School of Education and College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, University of California, Davis, California, USA.
James I. Grieshop
Affiliation:
Department of Human and Community Development, University of California, Davis, California, USA.
Patrick H. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of California, California, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

University of California (UC) scientists have established critical values (CVs) for almond production, but the nutritional information the CVs provide may be outdated and insufficient. In December 2006, researchers at UC Davis conducted focus group interviews with a sample of stakeholders in California's almond industry. The focus groups were designed to collect information relating to factors affecting growers' nutrition decisions, priorities in education and research relating to plant nutrition, and expected consequences of environmental regulation for the industry. Stakeholders identified problems with the CVs and voiced concern about the future of the almond industry in light of impending environmental regulations. Many stakeholders identified university research as a way to protect the industry by providing strong, recent scientific data on which nutritional limits and environmental regulations can be based. The focus groups served as a useful research method for obtaining detailed information about stakeholders' motivations and priorities and also for informing a quantitative follow-up survey that was subsequently mailed to a larger population of Californian almond growers.

Keywords

focus groupsalmondcritical valuesnutrition
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 309 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Sumner, M.E. 2006. Soil testing and plant analysis: building a future on our legacy. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 37:2277–2287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Marschner, H. 1995. Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. Academic Press, London, UK.Google Scholar
3Andersen, M.A., Blank, S.C., LaMendola, T., and Sexton, R.J. 2002. California's cattle and beef industry at the crossroads. California Agriculture 56:152–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Brodt, S., Zalom, F., Krebill-Prather, R., Bentley, W., Pickel, C., Connell, J., Wilhoit, L., and Gibbs, M. 2005. Almond growers rely on pest control advisers for integrated pest management. California Agriculture 59:242–248.Google Scholar
5Brodt, S., Goodell, P.B., Krebill-Prather, R.L., and Vargas, R.N. 2007. California cotton growers utilize integrated pest management. California Agriculture 61:24–30.Google Scholar
6Blake, G., Sandler, H.A., Coli, W., Pober, D.M., and Coggins, C. 2007. An assessment of grower perceptions and factors influencing adoption of IPM in commercial cranberry production. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 22:134–144.Google Scholar
7Bitsch, V. 2005. Qualitative research: a grounded theory example and evaluation criteria. Journal of Agribusiness 23(1):75–91.Google Scholar
8Krueger, R. and Casey, M.A. 2000. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.Google Scholar
9Bitsch, V. 2004. Focus group discussions as a research and extension method: the case of personnel management issues in horticultural businesses. Acta Horticulturae 655:461–469.Google Scholar
10Düvel, G.H. and Kalanzi, A.S. 1999. Needs assessment in extension: a comparative analysis of structured individual and participative group surveys. In Conference 33. Participation and Partnerships in Extension and Rural Development. South African Society for Agricultural Extension, Bloemfontein, South Africa.Google Scholar
11Murray, H. and Butler, L.M. 1994. Whole farm case studies and focus groups: participatory strategies for agricultural research and education programs. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 9:38–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Lopus, S.E., Santibanez, M.P., Beede, R.H., Duncan, R., Edstrom, J., Niederholzer, F., Trexler, C.J., and Brown, P.H.Almond growers' nutrition programs are assessed and compared with theoretical best management practices. California Agriculture 64(3): forthcoming.Google Scholar
13Krueger, R. 1994. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.Google Scholar
14Strauss, A. 1987. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
15Rodriguez, J.M., Molnar, J.J., Fazio, R.A., Sydnor, E., and Lowe, M.J. 2008. Barriers to adoption of sustainable agriculture practices: change agent perspectives. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24:60–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar