HUMAN CAPITAL, COMMUNICATIONS - Completed Projects

|| Home || Search || Contact ||

RIRDC Completed Projects in 1998-1999 & Research in Progress as at June 1999
BACK TO INDEX

SUB-PROGRAM 4.3 HUMAN CAPITAL, COMMUNICATIONS
AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS

To Research in Progress

COMPLETED PROJECTS

Project Title	Managing farming: how farmers learn (interim report)
RIRDC Project No.:	UT-18A
Researcher:	Dr Sue Kilpatrick
Organisation:	Centre for Research and Learning in Regional Australia University of Tasmania PO Box 1214, LAUNCESTON TAS 7250
Phone:	03 6324 3018
Fax:	03 6324 3040
Email:	Sue.Kilpatrick@utas.edu.au
Internet:	http://www.CRLRA.utas.edu.au
Objectives	To determine how male and female farmer learning for management and marketing can be improved.
Background	Industry leaders and agricultural educators (‘experts’) believe that farmers should be participating in training about management and marketing, while few farmers plan to attend training in these areas. This report examines the differing perceptions of experts and farmers in relation to farmers’ management and marketing learning needs.
Research	Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 85 male and female representatives of farm management teams in five States and Territories. They were asked to reflect on the change process and the usefulness of various learning sources.
Outcomes	More progressive farmers were proactive in identifying and meeting learning needs in management and marketing and were also the group most likely to have used training in learning for change, and to plan to train to meet learning needs in the future. Most farmers used multiple learning sources when learning about management, marketing and management-related issues. Most used informal sources, mainly experts, supplemented by observation and experience, other farmers, and print and electronic media. Training was very rarely the only source used.
Implications	Farmer-directed groups and agricultural organisations have an important role to play in farmer education and training. Both are able to deliver similar content and provide many of the features which make education and training effective for adult learners. Experts also have an important role in management and marketing education. They are in a position to promote suitable activities to farmers at a time when the farmers are contemplating changes to their practices, and when they are most likely to see some relevance in the training activities. Farmer learning is enhanced by learning and support networks. Male and female farmers should be encouraged to make greater use of learning networks which include other farmers and experts.

Project Title	Incorporating an understanding of the process of research development and extension processes into Vocational Education and Training courses.
RIRDC Project No.:	VPI-1A
Researchers:	Lyn Hughes
Organisation:	Primary Skills Victoria Sunnyside Pyrenees Highway ELMHURST VIC 3469
Phone:	03 5354 8262, 03 9428 9811
Fax:	03 5354 8289, 03 9428 9931
Objectives	To identify whether a need exists for the production of resource material that would assist TAFE trainers to incorporate the development of an understanding of R&D processes, practices and organisations in training programs delivered to young people undertaking entry level training.
Background	This project is Stage one of a two stage project It was developed as a means of contributing to the range of strategies required to support the on-going relationship between the farming community and all aspects of the R&D process. Such strategies are required to encourage improved rates of adoption of R&D outcomes by the agriculture industry. The project targeted young people at the beginning of their careers in agriculture, those participating in new apprenticeships and other types of entry level training through the vocational education and training system. These young people are the farm owners, farm managers and farm workers of the future.
Research	The project was carried out through consultation with industry representatives, personnel in R&D organisations, TAFE and secondary school teachers, practising farmers and students. The project aimed to identify; the entry level training programs into which R&D information should be integrated R&D resource material currently available for use by trainers/teachers the resource material that requires development, and the appropriate teaching strategies to be used with the target audience.
Outcomes	In response to requests R&D organisations provide resource material for students undertaking TAFE entry level programs. In addition some organisations carry out R&D activities with the target audience. However, with a few important exceptions, material is not developed specifically for use by these young people and their teachers/trainers. TAFE and secondary school teachers undertake many activities that expose their students to R&D processes, practices and organisations. In general the teaching method used incorporates a ‘hands on’ approach to learning. However trainers provide these activities in an ad hoc fashion, with little support material and little exposure to each other’s practices or ideas. In addition, the shift in the TAFE system towards workplace based training requires the development of activities that can be undertaken and assessed on farm and by farmers.
Implications	Teachers working in TAFE institutes and secondary schools recognise that students undertaking entry level programs, for example new apprentices, benefit from activities that help them to develop an understanding of R&D processes, practices and organisations. Training providers would be greatly assisted if they had access to a resource kit providing support materials and a range of activities directed towards improving student/apprentice understanding of R&D. The activities should be able to be undertaken both on farm and/or off farm.

Rural Communities and Social Issues

Project Title	Employment patterns of farmers and factors affecting off-farm employment
RIRDC Project No.:	ABA-6A
Researchers:	Gil Rodriguez
Organisation:	ABARE GPO Box 858 CANBERRA ACT 2601
Phone:	02 6272 2189
Fax:	02 6272 2318
Email:	grodriquez@abare.gov.au
Objectives	To release analysis in 1997-98 which will facilitate increased understanding of the employment patterns and employment opportunities of farm men and women; contribute to the development of strategies to overcome any constraints to participation in off farm employment facilitate efficient adjustment in agriculture; and increase understanding of the interdependence of farming and rural communities.
Background	Analysis of issues, such as gender contributions to farm work and the wellbeing of the family and community, has been limited by the lack of gender data on time spent in all work activities. As well, there has been little data on the nature of off-farm work and farmers' skills and experience in the off-farm labour market.
Research	Data on hours worked by farm women and men in farm work, off-farm work, household and community work were analysed on a gender basis. The contribution of farm and off-farm work to household income was also considered. The type and location of the work of farm women and men off-farm as well as factors influencing participation in off-farm employment were discussed. ABARE collected much of the information on these topics for the first time in its 1996-97 annual farm surveys.
Outcomes & Implications	Both women and men work long hours in the context of a marked gender division of labour within the farm family. Total hours worked by both women and men on broadacre and diary farms exceeded 60 hours a week through 1996-97, but the work that they did was quite different. Hours spent in off-farm employment were relatively small but important to the income of 40 per cent of farm families. Family income from off-farm work was $27 179 for these families, slightly more than their cash income from the farm. However, family income from all sources for these families was $57 257, similar to that of families without off-farm employment. Most farmers with off farm employment worked for wages or salaries and most had been in the same job for several years. The work of women off-farm tended to be limited to locations within short travelling time of the farm. Almost half of these women had a professional background and over half were engaged in the education and health sectors. Women with two or more children of preschool age were less likely to be engaged in off-farm work than other women.

Project Title	HEYWIRE: The ABC gives regional youth a voice
RIRDC Project No.:	ABB-1A
Researchers:	Lucy Broad
Organisation:	Australian Broadcasting Corporation PO Box 358 TOOWOOMBA QLD 4350
Phone:	07 4638 9042
Email:	broad.lucy@A2.abc.net.au
Objectives	To give regional/rural youth an opportunity to voice their opinions and visions on ABC Local Radio, Triple J and Radio National To raise awareness, in both city and country areas, of issues facing youth in regional and rural Australia To develop and provide training for a network of young regional rural youth to decision makers at a local, state and federal level.
Background	There is regular coverage of the problems of declining rural communities and potentially how it might impact on young people, but very little is heard from the young people themselves. ABC Radio undertook to hear from young people in regional areas what they saw as the issues affecting them and to provide some training and opportunities to assist them to have their ideas and concerns heard. This would also provide some valuable insights into the issues affecting young people, as there is little material available of this nature at the moment.
Research	Heywire was launched in September 1998, by asking young people in regional areas, aged between 15 and 22, to send us a story about something they felt strongly about to do with living in regional Australia. It could be something they loved, or hated, or something they were really concerned about. No parameters were set, except to say it needed to be in the form of a radio piece or radio script about four minutes long, and it needed to be non-fiction.
Outcomes	Heywire received 260 entries from around Australia covering issues ranging from the perceptions of young people about life in rural areas and the problems of boredom and isolation to the handling of crisis caused by suicide, alcoholism and domestic violence. There were good news stories as well, about initiatives of young people and their friends involved in community activities, and providing creative vents and entertainment, when previously there had been very little.
Implications	The winning entries from each of the ABC's regional stations were produced and played locally, as well as on national programming over the ABC's summer period. Each of the regional winners was invited to attend a Youth Training Seminar in Canberra in February, where they spent three days as a group doing some planning and leadership/communications skills training, as well as gaining a better understanding of the processes of government.

Project Title	Determining the social and economic impact of declining rural community infrastructure on the sheep and wheat belt in WA
RIRDC Project No.:	ECU-1A
Researchers:	Fiona Haslam McKenzie
Organisation:	Edith Cowan University, Churchlands Campus, WESTERN AUSTRALIA 6018
Phone:	08 9273 8781
Fax:	08 9273 8754
Objectives	To determine the social and economic impact of declining rural community infrastructure in the Central wheatbelt of Western Australia and to better understand the links between economic, social and environmental issues in that region.
Background	A preliminary survey indicated farmers were making business choices based on the need for income generation to cover expenses associated with declining infrastructure. Some decisions based on those choices could have a long term detrimental effect on the social and physical environment and subsequently, the quality of agricultural production, as well as the population base of the region. There were also indications that some services were crucial, and without them, communities showed signs of decay.
Research	There were three major components to the research. A database was compiled from local electoral roles in the lower Central Wheatbelt ABS statistical divisions. A pilot questionnaire was devised, sent and processed, after which the main questionnaire surveyed 2000 farm enterprises by random selection from the database, followed by face to face on-farm, one hour interviews with 68 respondents from throughout the Central Wheatbelt. The interviews were conducted in a semi-formal structure. The questions were semi-structured, following the framework of the questionnaire. There were also four focus groups in key regional centres. A range of descriptive statistics were calculated using Excel 7 pivot tables. Crosstabs and Chi Square were calculated using SPSS 7.5. The qualitative data was analysed using NUD*IST
Outcomes	A wide range of services have been withdrawn from the Central Wheatbelt or centralised in the last decade. In most cases this has caused inconvenience, additional access costs and in several cases persistent stress. Few of these changes actually cause people to leave their community or industry with the exception of educational services. The research showed that farm families do compromise their family arrangements as well as their conservation programs, ‘over farm’ and take off-farm work to provide their children with an education. The study also found that a change in service provision has the potential to compromise towns and then communities, because people change their buying and social habits to coincide with their access of services. It also found that mental health issues were a concern for a significant number of respondents, and that farm succession issues jeopardised business efficiency and often caused families to break up and leave communities, contributing to an already negative population trend in the Central Wheatbelt region.
Implications	The study showed that reduction in infrastructure funding has the potential to change some communities and some people and businesses find it difficult to adapt. People are responding to the stresses of rural living and farm businesses by selling up and leaving. Their leaving impacts on the viability of some services and the general vigour of the community. It has also showed that, while policies are driven by government and business at an international level, policy makers work within frames of reference that many of those in rural communities do not necessarily identify with. Most participants viewed their economic wellbeing as inextricably tied up with the social vigour of their community and it would also seem that the social and economic circumstances of farm enterprises can have a direct impact on resources made available to the environmental needs of their farm enterprise. Access to a more efficient telecommunications system would fill many of the gaps left by the reduction of some services and may also assist in accessible long distance adult education and community projects. The study showed that farming is changing at an exponential pace and farm enterprises must have the financial, managerial and technical ability to survive.

Project Title	The impact of tax driven financial investment on new industry development
RIRDC Project No.:	AGT-3A
Researchers:	Dr Peter Chudleigh
Organisation:	Agtrans Research PO Box 385 TOOWONG QLD 4066
Phone:	07 3870 9564
Fax:	07 3371 3381
Objectives	To assess the effectiveness and economics of investment of tax-driven capital raising schemes in new agricultural/horticultural industry development, effectiveness being measured in terms of increasing the rate of development of the industry and economics referring to the return on funds by the investors in the scheme.
Background	Tax-driven agricultural and horticultural development schemes are those that rely on raising large amounts of financial resources with significant tax effectiveness from many non-farm investors and where resources so assembled are used in part for development of agricultural/horticultural enterprises. The contribution of tax-driven investment ventures has not been objectively assessed, and definition of the contribution of agricultural and horticultural investment ventures to the development of new and emerging agricultural and horticultural industries is likely to be useful to RIRDC.
Research	Over 100 agricultural and horticultural tax-driven investment ventures in Australia in operation since 1988 were identified and base level information on these schemes was compiled and analysed. Seven ventures were selected for case study analysis and the report presents general conclusions from this analysis.
Outcomes	Key findings of the study include Considerable sums of money have been raised through agricultural investment ventures Some agricultural investment ventures have contributed significantly to new industry growth and development It is not uncommon for ventures to be restructured in the early years following commencement Actual economic returns to investors have been less than that projected in prospectuses Based upon actual economic returns made to investors to date, and projections of future returns, overall economic returns to investors are typically marginally positive or negative Additional R&D effort by investment ventures should be encouraged in the future to assist the development of new and emerging agricultural industries. The final report provides some recommendations for RIRDC and other key organisations. Benefits from the study may accrue as a result of an improved management framework within which the tax-driven schemes are set.
Implications	Improved coordination between RIRDC and new industry development arising due to tax driven investment ventures may have implications for improved use of resources to encourage new and emerging agricultural and horticultural industry growth and development. An important implication of the study is that considerable funds are raised for new industry development by tax driven investment ventures, and expenditure of these funds to result in new industry development could be improved through interactions with RIRDC.

Policies and Institutions

Project Title	Creative research environments
RIRDC Project No.:	SYC-4A
Researchers:	Tony Gleeson, Graeme Russell, Elizabeth Woods, Bea Duffield and Shaun Coffey
Organisation:	Synapse Consulting P O Box 3746 SOUTH BRISBANE QLD 4101
Phone:	07 3844 2370
Fax:	07 3844 1755
Email:	syncons@ozemail.com.au
Objectives	To identify principles for promoting creativity in agricultural R & D in ways conducive to their adoption and further examination and development.
Background	The OECD defines research and development (R&D) as creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture and society and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications. This definition of R&D is adopted widely, in Australia and elsewhere. However, the creative essence of R&D is seldom recognised. Creativity is the accepted life-blood of music, literature and the arts but is rarely associated with science. Creative Research Environments seeks to fill this gap by examining the nature of creativity, what drives people to be creative and which environmental factors affect creativity. The project has relevance generally to R&D. However agricultural R&D has a number of characteristics which suggest there may be a particular need to remove constraints to creativity in agricultural R&D.
Research	The research involved an extensive literature search and analysis, focus group discussions with scientists and their managers in three major public sector agricultural R&D organisations, the conduct of a national workshop to discuss and further analyse the collected information and data and the preparation of a comprehensive report on the project.
Outcomes	The project identified a comprehensive bank of literature relevant to promoting creativity in agricultural R&D. From this literature it has been possible to describe the nature of creativity, the factors driving people to be creative and the general characteristics of environments conducive to creativity. Not surprisingly creativity is dramatically influenced by the motivational state of the creative person and by the people who act as gatekeepers for ideas in relation to particular domains or disciplines. For agricultural research these gatekeepers include people in industry and in research funding and managing organisations. Focus group discussions across a wide range of agricultural R&D situations provided a surprisingly consistent view that creativity in agricultural R&D is being constrained by: Lack of effective leadership. Policies governing the funding and direction of agricultural R&D. Managerial and administrative procedures. Lack of communication, team building and training. The project identified five principles for promoting creativity in agricultural R&D. They are simple principles, indeed stunningly so, given the complexity of the creative process and of the institutional cultures within which agricultural R&D operates. The five principles are: 1. GOALS Creativity is fostered by setting both creativity and productivity goals but not by prescribing R&D processes to attain them. 2. BOUNDED FREEDOM Creativity is affected by the psychic balance experienced by the researcher or field participant between what she/he seeks to achieve and what the organisation or group desires her/him to achieve. 3. RECOGNITION Creativity is enhanced by reward and recognition, as long as it is experienced as an appreciative and/or informational event and not as a means to control or manipulate. 4. SOCIAL INTERACTION Appropriate peer and social interaction is an essential prerequisite to creativity. 5. LEADERSHIP The development and communication of insightful organisational visions and leadership help foster creativity.
Implications	The implication of the findings of this project is that industry, research funders and research organisations should review their policies and processes should they wish to improve the creativity of agricultural R&D.
Publications	Tony Gleeson, Graeme Russell and Elizabeth Woods (1999), Creative Research Environments: Environmental factors affecting creativity in agricultural research in Australia. Available from RIRDC.

Farm Health and Safety

Project Title	Preventing farm injuries - overcoming the barriers
RIRDC Project No.:	UMO-15A
Researchers:	Dr Lesley Day
Organisation:	Monash University Accident Research Centre Building 70 Wellington Road CLAYTON VIC 3168
Phone:	03 9905 1811
Fax:	03 9905 1809
Objectives	The overall goal of this project was to reduce the economic and social costs of farm injury. The specific objective was to address constraints to the adoption of farm safety practices by: Evaluation of the initial implementation of a national farm safety training initiative, Managing Farm Safety designed to address the lack of a framework within which individual farmers can manage safety issues Documentation of constraints on farm injury reduction and relevant current initiatives Identification of new potential initiatives
Background	Safety has been recognised as a key issue for the rural workforce. In detailed studies of work related fatalities in Australia for the period 1982-1984, the rural industries group accounted for 19% of all Australian occupational deaths, with 100 deaths annually. Evidence is now emerging to suggest that the position of agriculture has worsened relative to that of other industries. Further, farm injury costs $A200-300 million annually in Australia, which is 13-20% of the net value of farm production. In addition, farm families and communities are affected, emotionally, economically and socially by the death or serious injury of a member.
Research	The first objective was achieved using a quasi-experimental design with non-equivalent intervention and comparison groups. Farmers participating in Managing Farm Safety were invited to participate in the study and asked to complete a short baseline questionnaire prior to the training session. A comparison group of farmers, frequency matched on age and commodity group were selected randomly by telephone and interviewed with similar items from the baseline questionnaire. Both groups were followed up after six months to document farm safety action taken since the baseline survey. Recruitment commenced early in 1996 and all follow up was completed by late 1997. Objectives 2 and 3 were achieved through a series of semi structured telephone interviews conducted in 1996 with 30 key informants drawn from the range of professions, organisations and groups that are currently involved in planning and delivering farm health and safety programs, courses and activities to farmers and farm communities across Australia.
Outcomes	The main effects of Managing Farm Safety we were able to detect were that farmers who had completed the program were four times as likely as the comparison farmers to use goggles frequently for workshop activities, eight times as likely to use hearing protection frequently on cabinless tractors, and four times as likely to participate in other farm safety training courses. These effects were particularly pronounced among those who did not report these characteristics at baseline. Among farmers who had not conducted a safety check in the 6 months prior to the baseline survey, we found that 25% of the intervention group had conducted a safety check at follow-up, in contrast to 2% of the comparison group. Among those intervention farmers who had conducted a safety check during the follow-up period, 84% made changes to address the identified potential safety hazards. These changes frequently involved improving the safety features of equipment or the farm environment (70%), as distinct from changes which required safety behaviours to be frequently repeated (30%).
Implications	The more successful injury prevention programs have generally implemented a mixture of education, environmental, design, legislative and enforcement strategies. An important challenge in farm safety is to design the right mix of strategies and countermeasures that produces the safest farm work environment, systems and behaviours which are compatible with the other needs of farmers such as high productivity. This challenge is being met by Farmsafe Australia and others who are bringing a planned systems approach to bear on farm safety, and addressing some of the constraints identified in this research. In addition to action being taken by the farming community, the general consensus from this research is that governments (through responsible authorities) also need to be more committed and active in providing personnel, funding and other incentives to reduce the unacceptably high rates of death and injury on farms in Australia.

Project Title	Tractor driving and the low back - the effect of an air cushion and a swivel seat on spinal movement during rotation
RIRDC Project No.:	USA 3A
Researcher:	Sheila Scutter
Organisation:	University of South Australia NORTH TERRACE ADELAIDE 5000
Phone:	08 83022585
Fax	08 8302 2766
Email:	sheila.scutter@unisa.edu.au
Objectives	To study the incidence of back pain in farmers. To investigate the effect of an inflated cushion and a swivel seat on spinal movement during rotation. To investigate the effect of an inflated cushion on back pain in the field.
Background	Back pain is common in farmers, and has been shown in previous research to be related to the exposure to vibration which farmers experience while driving tractors. The rotated posture which is often used while operating tractors may also be a factor. Various methods of reducing the effects of vibration and a rotated posture are used by farmers, but more information is needed about their effectiveness and mechanisms of operation.
Research	A questionnaire was used to determine the incidence of back pain in farmers, and work practices related to the back pain. Questionnaires were sent to subjects recruited from across South Australia. A Laboratory trial of the effect of an air cushion and a swivel seat on spinal movement during rotation, as measured by the 3-Space Tracker. Subjects attended on one occasion and were tested during four experimental conditions. A Field trial of the effect of the air cushion on back and neck pain, as monitored by a logbook. Subjects were given a logbook, which was to collect data during normal tractor driving activities.
Outcomes	The results of the questionnaire showed that farmers experienced considerable neck and back pain during normal working activities. As might be expected, heavy farm work like sheep handling increased back pain, but driving a tractor was a significant factor in precipitating back pain. Driving a tractor was much more of a problem than other forms of driving. Using an inflatable air cushion significantly reduced back pain during and after tractor driving, and reduced neck pain whilst driving. . In laboratory trials, the inflatable cushion was shown to have a similar effect to a swivel seat, changing the movement patterns to allow increased rotation. Although the laboratory findings suggest a mechanism for the positive effects of the cushion noted by farmers, no conclusions can be drawn regarding the efficacy of this cushion compared to other cushions
Implications	Operating a tractor is a significant factor in the development of back and neck pain in farmers. Therefore it is appropriate to investigate tractor seating and methods of use in farmers presenting with back pain. Simple devices such as an air-filled cushion and a swivel seat result in changes in the movement patterns in the low back, which may result in less strain on the spine. Field trials showed that an air-filled cushion can significantly decrease back and neck pain symptoms experienced by farmers.

Last updated: 7 September 1999
Copyright © RIRDC
http://www.rirdc.gov.au/99comp/hcc2.htm