Search

California is the largest agricultural economy in the United States; however, its current and projected climate risks pose significant challenges. Farmers will need to adapt to climate change in their farming practices. The goal of this needs assessment was to understand farmers' perceptions and experiences with climate change exposures; the risk management practices they currently use; and what tools and resources would assist them in making strategic decisions. A statewide survey was conducted through Qualtrics with farmers (n = 341). Results showed that 67% of the farmers agree (agree + strongly agree) that climate change is happening, and 53.1% agreed that actions are required. Moreover, historically underrepresented farmers were very concerned about climate change-related impacts related to water, temperatures, and natural disasters. Farmers are currently implementing adaptation practices related to water management, soil health, and renewable energy and are also seeking insurance and government assistance programs to increase agricultural resilience. They also expressed interest and a high need for information on those adaptation practices to acquire skills and knowledge to manage various challenges of farming in variable climates. Also, the assessment established that farmers (47.5%) use decision-support tools, mostly weather stations (22.4%); and 51.9% indicated their interest in using online tools designed to translate climate information into forms that support production decision-making. Farmers (60.8%) responded that they would or may attend workshops to learn about adaptation practices. The findings of this needs assessment will inform the development of extension education programs on climate-smart agriculture for farmers in California and elsewhere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare differences in patient-provider communication among patients who, prior to contraceptive counseling, used or did not use a decision support tool ("My Birth Control") which has educational and interactive modules and produces a provider printout with the patient's preferences.Methods: As part of a cluster-randomized trial of the tool in four San Francisco safety net clinics, we collected and thematically analyzed 70 audio recordings of counseling visits (31 pre- and 39 post-tool implementation) from 15 providers randomized to the intervention.Results: Without the tool, most providers began by asking participants what method they were considering and focused counseling on that method or on directing patients towards long-acting reversible contraception; with the tool, most focused on reviewing and discussing multiple methods of interest to the participant as indicated on the printout. Discussion of patients' preferences for specific method features was not observed in pre-implementation recordings but was part of several post-implementation recordings. Several participants explicitly noted they had gained knowledge from the tool.Conclusion: Observed counseling differences suggest the tool may have a positive impact on patient-centeredness of contraceptive counseling, consistent with findings from the main study.Practice Implications: My Birth Control shows potential for improving patient-centeredness in counseling without extensive provider training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Environmental managers and planners have become increasingly enthusiastic about the potential of decision support tools (DSTs) to improve environmental decision-making processes as information technology transforms many aspects of daily life. Discussions about DSTs, however, rarely recognize the range of ways software can influence users' negotiation, problem-solving, or decision-making strategies and incentives, in part because there are few empirical studies of completed processes that used technology. This mixed-methods study-which draws on data from approximately 60 semi-structured interviews and an online survey-examines how one geospatial DST influenced participants' experiences during a multi-year marine planning process in California. Results suggest that DSTs can facilitate communication by creating a common language, help users understand the geography and scientific criteria in play during the process, aid stakeholders in identifying shared or diverging interests, and facilitate joint problem solving. The same design features that enabled the tool to aid in decision making, however, also presented surprising challenges in certain circumstances by, for example, making it difficult for participants to discuss information that was not spatially represented on the map-based interface. The study also highlights the importance of the social context in which software is developed and implemented, suggesting that the relationship between the software development team and other participants may be as important as technical software design in shaping how DSTs add value. The paper concludes with considerations to inform the future use of DSTs in environmental decision-making processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Incorporating science into resource conservation and management is becoming increasingly important, but it is not yet clear how to provide information to decision makers most effectively. To evaluate sources of information used to support the management and conservation of California's riparian bird habitat, we distributed a questionnaire to restoration practitioners and public and private land managers. We asked respondents to rate the importance and availability of different sources of information they use to inform their decisions. Synthetic reviews and peer-reviewed publications both received high importance and availability ratings. Web-based tools received low importance and availability ratings. One-on-one interactions between ecologists and decision makers received high importance ratings, similar to those of peer-reviewed publications and synthetic reviews, but their availability was rated lower than any other method of decision support. Our results suggest that the decision makers we surveyed are already using a wide variety of information, but that prioritizing one-on-one interactions between scientists and decision makers will enhance the delivery of all sources of information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]