Impact Examples: Natural Resource Management (NRM) Communication Programming

Final Results of the Alam Sehat Lestari Five Year Impact Survey

Alam Sehat Lestari (ASRI) is an Indonesian non-governmental organisation (NGO) that exchanges healthcare for work by villages to prevent logging in order to protect the biodiversity of the Gunung Palung National Park on the island of Borneo. A part of its communication work on forest health includes the Forest Guardians, a programme for monitoring logging in these communities. Forest Guardians conduct community outreach, bringing loggers around to seeking alternative livelihoods.

Selected conservation indicators (2007-2012):

• A two-thirds increase in non-logging villages - from six to ten, out of 30 total villages served.
• Loggers who met with Forest Guardians: more than 50% stopped logging, 25% considered stopping.
• Loggers who attended an ASRI meeting: more than 50% stopped, more than 40% considered stopping.
• Percentage of active loggers decreased from 9% to 3%.
• 9% of respondents considered logging acceptable, and less than 1.3% thought it unavoidable.

"Five years ago there were more than 100 people in my village doing illegal logging, now there are less than 10." Pak Bastarin, Village Headman

Chuyen Que Minh - Vietnam

This was a radio soap opera, broadcast twice a week throughout 2004. Each 20-minute episode of the serial aimed to communicate the principles and practices of integrated pest management (IPM) to Vietnamese rice farmers - that is, to raise awareness of the fact that misuse of insecticides hurts harvests. The campaign included a poster, a leaflet, advertising plugs for TV and radio, and a launching ceremony. In parallel with the radio broadcasts, radio clubs (where farmers gather together once a month to listen to previous episodes and discuss the stories and educational issues) were organised, quiz competitions were held weekly, and a "meet the actors" day was offered in the Vinh Long town hall.

2008 evaluation results:

• Fewer farmers (63.5%) believed that "all insects are bad" in the post-test than in the pre-test (79.1%). There were also significant reductions in farmers believing that insecticide sprays had to be applied in the first 40 days after sowing (from 79.8% to 47.6%) and that leaf damages would mean loss in yields (from 59.2% to 38.3%). On the other hand, more farmers believed that pesticides can affect their health, from 61.6% to 86.1%. More farmers in the post-test believed that reducing seed rates from 150–200 to 80–100 kilogram per hectare (kg/ha) would result in the same yields, and farmers also modified their beliefs that nitrogen would produce healthier crops.
• In the post-test survey, 41.4% of the respondents reported listening to the soap opera. Evaluators compared the attitudes of farmers exposed to the soap opera with those who were not. 54.2% of farmers who had listened believed that "all insects in rice fields are bad", as compared to 76.0% who had not. 17.7% of those who had listened believed that farmers should spray in the first 40 days after sowing, as compared to 69.3%. 94.1% of those who had listened believed that pesticides can affect human health, as compared to 82.3% of those who had not. Finally, 86.0% of farmers who had listened believed that too much insecticide use can cause insecticide resistance, as compared to 58.9% of non-listeners.
• Between pre- and post-launch, farmers' insecticide spray rates dropped 31% - from 1.9 to 1.3 sprays per season. Farmers also reported about 9% reduction in seed rates used - from a mean of 210.3 to 191.8 kg/ha - and about 7% reduction in nitrogen used, from 95.6 to 88.6 kg/ha. There were also slight reductions in the use of potassium and phosphorus; these were not significant. Yields reported were significantly different, with a mean of 4.75-5.12 tonnes (t)/ha in the pre- and post-test, respectively. More farmers in the post-test (30.3%) reported not using any insecticides at all than in the pre-test (17.5%).
• As noted above, in the post-test survey, 41.4% of the respondents reported listening to the soap opera. The evaluators compared the practices of those who had listened to the soap opera and those who had not. Farmers exposed to the soap opera had 33% reduction in their seed rates, 9% reduction in their nitrogen rates, and about 60% reduction in the number of insecticide sprays. In addition, there were significantly more farmers exposed to the soap opera who did not use any insecticides at all (54% compared with 15%).

Action by Canadians / Count Me In - Canada

The Action By Canadians and Count Me In! programmes are designed to communicate the issue of climate change to the Canadian public through workshops delivered to individuals at their place of work. The climate change workshop focuses on action by providing participants, at the end of the workshop, with an opportunity to make a commitment to reduce greenhouse gases by adopting specific measures in their personal lives. By October 2000, over 3,500 Canadians had participated in these workshops.

2000 evaluation showed:

• There was a change in awareness following the workshop. Participants prior to the workshop scored an average of 81% on the presurvey, but immediately following the workshop, participants scored 89% on the same survey questions.
• Two months after the workshop, almost 30% of participants responded to the follow-up request, and reported back on the actions they had completed as a result of the workshop. Of those who reported, a total of 1,333 tonnes of greenhouse gases were saved per year, for a total of over 2,300 kgs per person who reported.
• A number of participants also completed the awareness survey on the ABC and Count Me In! Websites. Six to eight weeks after the workshop, participants reported the following:
• 83% were more aware of climate change
• 90% were more aware of personal energy use
• 44% were more aware of TV programmes on climate change
• 62% were more aware of articles in the newspaper and magazines about climate change
• 45% reported that they had attempted to take public transit since they participated in the workshop.
• Between the two follow-up programmes, more than 40% of the workshop participants reported that they took specific action as a result of the workshop.

Arcandina - Ecuador

This was a national television show to promote awareness of and mobilise support for environmental conservation among children and adolescents in Ecuador. Broadcast weekly throughout the country, Arcandina ("The Andean Ark") used an education-through-entertainment approach, behaviour change strategies, and community mobilisation to encourage children to become environmentally responsible citizens. At the end of its first season in December 1997, 40 shows had been produced in Ecuador and were aired nationally and internationally. The television show is also complemented by activities in schools. A network of primary schools pre-tested a curriculum that incorporates population-environment themes into all areas of study.

1998 evaluation results:

• A pre- and post-evaluation with the control group revealed that students ages 6 to 12 who worked with the Arcandina curriculum in their classrooms for 6 months improved their knowledge of population and environment. For example:
• Knowledge that water consumption is dependent on population needs and that this is a key problem to maintaining a healthy environment increased from 50% to 75%
• Knowledge that erosion is due to uncontrolled forestry by human populations increased from 39.1% to 74.5%
• Knowledge that the destruction of the environment is due to human behaviors increased from 33% to 75%.
  

Energy Conservation TV Programme - United States

Broadcast four times on cable television in Roanoke, Virginia, United States in 1982, this 20-minute programme suggested simple, no-cost strategies for reducing household energy consumption. During the five weeks following the programme's viewing, electricity meters were read once a week at each household, and some of the participants received weekly forms and a 30-minute home visit. The participants were asked to evaluate the TV programme and their level of comfort in the house. During the following winter a similar programme was shown to the same households in order to remind the participants about energy substitution strategies.

1985 evaluation showed:

• Short-term increase in knowledge about the energy issues and substitution strategies was observed (there was no test for long-term impacts). Whereas before viewing the programme, participants were correct 44% of the time when answering questions related to energy use, they were correct about 74% the time after viewing.
• Exposure to the TV programme, and not personal contact, was the most important element. In fact, contact with participants was not beneficial. The first follow-up indicated that the participants who viewed the programme, but who were not contacted by the project (no phone call, no home visit), reduced their energy use by 17%, while the participants who were contacted reduced their energy use by only 6%.
• The results show that even a single viewing of the programme resulted in the adoption of some simple, no-cost cooling strategies that yielded overall electricity savings of 10% (yielding a 23% savings on electricity used for cooling). However, the following summer, residents returned to their pre-programme energy usage. One explanation is that the participants' low-budget share for energy moderated the effectiveness of the media intervention.
• ‘Personal reasons', such as saving money were found to be more persuasive than ‘environmental protection' reasons for energy conservation. It cost about US$1 per home to encourage viewing via phone and written prompts.