Accelerating Movement Through the Stages of ...

Accelerating Movement Through the Stages of Change for Forest Conservation: a ‘best practice’ literature review and synthesis SUBMITTED TO:

Kristina Castille

American Forest Foundation

SUBMITTED BY:

Jay Kassirer Cullbridge Marketing and Communications Final Report May 23, 2017

1. Table of Contents 1. Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................2 2. Introduction and Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................................3 3.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6 3.2 Foundation Articles ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 3.3 Recent Overviews: Accessible articles that summarize current thinking on Stages of Change theory ........................ 9 4. Accelerating Movement at Each Stage of Change ...................................................................................................... 10 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 10 4.2 Moving People towards Preparation: the Learn Stages ............................................................................................. 11 4.3 Moving People towards Action: the Preparation Stage ............................................................................................. 25 4.4 The Act Stage: where to next?.................................................................................................................................... 31 5. Measuring Movement from One Stage to the Next ................................................................................................... 37 5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 37 5.2 Measures .................................................................................................................................................................... 37 5.3 Data Collection ........................................................................................................................................................... 39 5.4 Questionnaire Validation ........................................................................................................................................... 39 5.5 Research Design ......................................................................................................................................................... 42 6. Context and Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 43 7. References ................................................................................................................................................................. 44

2. Introduction and Executive Summary AFF has been working to engage woodland owners in sustainable forest management for 75 years through the American Tree Farm System. For the last five years it has tried to reach unengaged landowners through social marketing and other behavior change strategies. AFF targets a number of one-time or occasional forest management actions that these landowners can take on their lands, depending on individual circumstances. In preparation for taking action, a key step is for these landowners to arrange a visit with a professional forester, who helps determine which actions are called for. AFF’s current interventions are largely based on Prochaska and DiClemente’s Stages of Change Theory (Transtheoretical Model). AFF commissioned this report so it could learn and document how to accelerate the movement from one stage of change to the next. The following table provides an overview of the information in this report. The three colored columns represent the three stages in AFF’s program planning and evaluation model: Learn, Prepare and Act. Within each stage there are various activities that program participants can undertake, requiring varying levels of effort. The purple (Learn) column is divided into two in the bottom part of the chart, to distinguish between what Prochaska and DiClemente (P&D) called Precontemplation and Contemplation.

Overview of AFF’s Three Stages of Change, Accelerating Movement through Them Stage of Change (AFF) Example Indicators

Learn

Precontemplators do not respond to your communications, ask for information or attend your events Contemplators may:  respond to a survey  request written information materials  sign up for e-tips  sign up for MLP  attend an informational event

Prepare

Those at this stage may:  request a visit with an untrained peer/neighbor  attend a workshop  request to meet with a trained expert (forester, biologist, trained landowner, natural resources professional)  request information about financial or technical assistance (inc. cost share)  request a stewardship or management plan  map their land through MLP  develop MLP goals, activities and task lists

Act

Those at this stage may:  complete specific parcel actions that meet project goals  have had cost share applications accepted and paid (pending F/U surveys, info from NRCS partner or forester)  host an event on their property  become an ambassador for a neighbor network  complete MLP activities and tasks  join Tree Farm (in ATFS)

Goals at this Stage



Move people to the ‘Prepare’ stage



Move people to the ‘Act’ stage

  

Stage of Change (P&D)

Precontemplation

Overview of people at this stage

 Don’t respond to communications  No intention to take action in the foreseeable future  Unaware of the risks or problems associated with inaction  Avoid reading, talking, or thinking about these risks or problems  Boosting Self efficacy and Response efficacy  Careful use of emotional appeals, incentives, norm appeals  Competitions  Dramatic Relief  Fostering SelfReevaluation and Environmental Reevaluation  Fostering Word-ofMouth Communication  Peer networks  Raising awareness of the benefits of action and the consequences of inaction  Social Liberation  Targeting Innovators and Early adopters at first  Tie-ins to disturbances, and to things that already interest and engage the

Approaches for accelerating movement to the next stage

Contemplation

 Aware of the risks or problems associated with inaction  Are starting to look at both the pros and cons of alternative responses  Ambivalent about taking action Those in the column to the left, plus:  “If-then” planning  Reducing Specific Barriers

Preparation

Keep people engaged at the ‘Act’ stage Encourage them to take on increasingly demanding actions Engage them in leadership roles within their communities and in neighboring ones Action

 Motivated and planning to take action in the immediate future  Are taking steps in that direction, such as meeting with a professional forester

 Already taking action on their lands in ways that directly improve forest management.

 Boosting Self efficacy and Response efficacy  Feedback and Recognition  Goal Setting  Group Feedback  Helping Relationships  Norm Appeals  Obtaining a Commitment (SelfLiberation)  Peer Networks  Personalized, Empowering Communication  Prompts  Reducing Specific Barriers  Reinforcement Management  Tie-ins to disturbances

 Boosting Self efficacy and Response efficacy  Counter-Conditioning  Feedback  Helping Relationships  Careful use of incentives, norm appeals  Peer Networks  Personal Challenges, Goal Setting  Personalized, Empowering Communication  Recognition  Reducing Specific Barriers  Reinforcement Management  Self-Liberation

audience  Vivid, Personalized, Credible, Empowering Communication

3. Overview of the Stages of Change (Transtheoretical) Model 3.1 Overview Prochaska’s and DiClemente’s Stages of Change model provides a framework and well-researched tool for segmenting target audiences by readiness for change, and for selecting strategies and tactics that work best at each stage. Prochaska and DiClemente described behavior change as a process involving progress through a series of six stages.

The Stages AFF’s model is based on this Stages of Change model, with the six stages reduced to three. Within each stage there are various activities that program participants can undertake, requiring varying levels of effort. Moving People towards Preparation: the Learn stage The first two of Prochaska and DiClemente’s six stages are combined in AFF’s “Learn” Stage 

Precontemplation (Not Ready / Unengaged): People at this stage will not have responded to your communications. They have no intention to take action in the foreseeable future, and are unaware of the risks or problems associated with inaction (e.g. increased susceptibility of their woods to disease as a result of monocultures or invasive species, and increased risk of a forest fire from accumulated underbrush.) They tend to avoid reading, talking, or thinking about these risks or problems.



Contemplation (Getting Ready): People at this stage are aware of the risks or problems associated with inaction, and are starting to look at both the pros and cons of alternative responses. They are ambivalent about taking action. Once the perceived pros outweigh the perceived cons, they move to the next stage. Targeted activities are learning-related (e.g. participating in surveys, requesting written information materials, signing up for e-tips, signing up for MLP, and attending an informational event.)

Moving People towards Action: the Prepare stage 

The third stage is called “Preparation” by Prochaska’s and DiClemente, and “Prepare” by AFF. People at this stage are motivated and planning to take action in the immediate future; they may even have undertaken small steps in that direction. Targeted activities are preparation-related. The highest priority activity at this stage is meeting with a professional Forester. Other forest management-related activities at this stage include: requesting a visit with an untrained peer/neighbor, attending a workshop, requesting to meet with a trained expert (forester, biologist, trained landowner, natural resources professional), requesting information about

financial or technical assistance (including cost sharing), requesting a stewardship or management plan, mapping their land through MLP, and developing MLP goals, activities and task lists. The Act Stage 

People in the “Act” Stage are already taking action on their land in ways that directly improve forest management. These are usually one-time actions, or if repeated it may be years between each repetition. In fact, it can take a year or more to complete some actions because many land actions have long lead times and/or seasonality to when they can be completed. The last three stages of Prochaska and DiClemente’s six stages are reduced to one stage in AFF’s model – the “Act” Stage, because two of Prochaska and DiClemente’s six stages - maintenance and termination - are not relevant to one time actions. Nonetheless, AFF is interested in people moving beyond this stage, to undertake further actions and also to gradually take on conservation leadership roles within their communities. In addition, AFF wants people who have done land actions recommended by a professional forester, to do so again in the future when appropriate.

Stages of Change models hold that, while progression through these stages may be linear, individuals tend to progress and regress in a cyclical pattern. That means that some people that have indicated an interest in working with a professional forester may in fact never follow through. Some who have met with a forester once may drop out before taking action. Some who take action once may drop out by the time it would be appropriate to contact a forester again. This is viewed as regression back to the “learn” stage. At the end of each table in section 4, there is a row that focuses on pitfalls and how to minimize such regression.

Decisional Balance (Benefits /Motivators/Pros vs. Barriers/Costs/Cons) The decisional balance between the pros (benefits / motivators) and cons (costs / barriers) of taking action changes with each stage. Those in the first two (learning) stages tend to discount the pros, and to both magnify and avoid thinking about the cons of taking action on their lands; they are often best engaged through a re-evaluation of the benefits to them and their significant others. In contrast, those in the preparation and action stages already see that the benefits are worth the costs. They are particularly influenced by ways of reducing those costs / barriers, learning new behaviors, making a commitment to act / change, setting goals, and helping relationships.

Processes of Change Prochaska’s and DiClemente’s Stages of Change model identifies ten cognitive, affective, and evaluative “processes of change” that are used to progress through the stages. These are divided into two groups: experiential processes and behavioral processes. The former are more helpful in the Learn and Preparation stages, while the later are more helpful at the Preparation and Act stages. The following list briefly describes each process as it relates to one time / infrequent actions. 

Experiential Processes (cognitive and affective strategies) 1. Consciousness Raising - Increasing awareness about inaction and its consequences

2. Dramatic Relief - Emotional arousal related to action or inaction, whether positive or negative arousal 3. Self-Reevaluation - Self reappraisal regarding taking action 4. Environmental Reevaluation - Social reappraisal to realize how action / inaction affects significant others at home and in one’s network 5. Social Liberation – Encountering social support for taking action 

Behavioral Processes (behavior management strategies) 6. Making a commitment to take action, based on beliefs that the action is doable and will make a difference (called “Self-Liberation” by Prochaska and DiClemente) 7. Helping Relationships - Finding supportive relationships that encourage and help in taking the action 8. Counter-Conditioning –Encouraging participants to notice, remember and be influenced by positive experiences (e.g. with a forester and local forest conservation organizations) in order to counter-condition prevailing conditioning (distrust and preconceptions about conservation actions and authority figures). Another example would be helping participants to change their mind sets about what a healthy forest looks like. Such counter-conditioning supports taking further steps. In the original (health-oriented) literature, this process of change focused on substituting healthy behaviors and thoughts for unhealthy behaviors and thoughts. 9. Reinforcement Management – Recognizing and otherwise rewarding taking action, which may support taking further steps 10. Stimulus Control – This process is not applicable to one-time actions. It usually focuses on providing reminders and cues that foster the desired repetitive behavior, and on removing those that encourage the competing / current repetitive behavior.

3.2 Foundation Articles Prochaska, J.O. and DiClemente, C.C. (1983) Stages and processes of self changes in smoking. Towards an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology; 5:390-395. Prochaska. J.O. (2008) Decision Making in the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change. Med Decis Making 2008;28:845–849. Prochaska, J.O., DiClemente, C.C., & Norcross, J.C. (1992). In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors. American Psychologist, Vol 47(9), Sep 1992, 1102-1114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.47.9.1102 Velicer, W. F, Prochaska, J. O., Fava, J. L., Norman, G. J., & Redding, C. A. (1998) Smoking cessation and stress management: Applications of the Transtheoretical Model of behavior change. Homeostasis, 38, 216233.

3.3 Recent Overviews: Accessible articles that summarize current thinking on Stages of Change theory Noar, S.M. (2017) Transtheoretical Model and Stages of Change in health and risk messaging. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. Retrieved from http://communication.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-324 (accessed March 31, 2017) Pike, C., Doppelt, B. & Herr, M. (2010). Climate Communications and Behavior Change: A Guide for Practitioners. Provides advice for each stage of change. http://www.climateaccess.org/sites/default/files/Climate%20Communications%20and%20Behavior%20Chan ge Wikipedia overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transtheoretical_model

4. Accelerating Movement at Each Stage of Change 4.1 Introduction The opportunities for accelerating change vary by stage of change, due to a number of factors. For example the decisional balance between the pros (benefits / motivators) and cons (costs / barriers) of doing the targeted behavior(s) changes with each stage, so people are more easily influenced by different factors at different stages. In addition, people usually need different kinds of information and help at different stages. For example, those at the Precontemplation stage are often best helped by stressing the benefits of doing the promoted behavior(s), while those at Preparation need help learning to do the behavior(s) and overcoming related barriers. A meta-analysis by Noar et al. (2007) of 57 studies showed that programs are more successful when they are tailored on the basis of stage of change, decisional balance, self efficacy and/or process of change.

4.2 Moving People towards Preparation: the Learn Stages AFF’s “Learn” Stage focuses on people who are engaged enough to look for information. Prochaska and DiClemente call this the Contemplation stage and add another stage before that called Precontemplation. People at the Precontemplation stage won’t even respond when you send them a message; they are unengaged. Those in these two stages tend to discount the pros and magnify and avoid thinking about the cons of doing the promoted behaviors; they are often best engaged through a re-evaluation of the benefits to them and their social environments. 4.2.1 Learn – Precontemplation Stage of Change

Summary of the Stage

Learn – Precontemplation (Unengaged; Non-responders; Not Ready; Disinterest; “I won’t change”) People at this stage don’t respond when you send them a message; they are unengaged. They are unaware of the risks or problems associated with inaction (e.g. increased susceptibility of their woods to disease as a result of monocultures or invasive species, and increased risk of a forest fire from accumulated underbrush) and tend to avoid reading, talking, or thinking about these risks or problems. They don’t see sufficient benefits from the one-time action(s) you are promoting, or from forest conservation in general, to bother paying attention. They may have had a bad experience in the past with forest conservation, foresters or related authority figures. They have no intention to take action in the foreseeable future. They are often best engaged through others in their personal networks and through helping them to re-evaluate the benefits, both to themselves and to others who are significant to them. The best communication channels to use at this stage therefore involve personal response efficacy and communication between individual landowners and trusted others in their networks. This does not need to be face-to-face communication; a number of programs have successfully used phone calls. Less personal approaches can also work in particular circumstances (e.g. communications that focus on issues the recipients are already interested in and engaged with; repeated messaging using different eye-catching communications each time; and communications offering incentives.) For more detail and full referencing, please refer to the summary table of case study findings below. At this stage the role of the conservation program staff /volunteer is to be like a nurturing parent. Ask questions, reflect with empathy, don't jump in and provide advice, don't be (or appear) judgmental, and gently point out any discrepancies between a landowner’s goals and statements.

Approaches for Accelerating Movement to the Next Stage

Raise awareness of the benefits of action and the consequences of inaction Foster SelfReevaluation and Environmental Reevaluation Target innovators and early adopters at first

Foster Word of Mouth Communication

Competitions

Encourage and support information seeking and reevaluation 

Consciousness Raising - Increase awareness about inaction and its consequences



Self-Reevaluation – Support self reappraisal regarding taking action



Environmental Reevaluation – Support self reevaluation of how action / inaction affects oneself and significant others

During the initial stages of a campaign, if there are not yet many people taking action, target Innovators and early adopters. These people tend to be venturesome, popular, better educated and social leaders; they tend to be active members of local community groups, attend political rallies, write a letter to the editor, and to have a keen interest in learning about environmental subjects. Therefore they can be found by contacting local community groups and by seeing who has recently written a letter to the editor. (Coyle, 2010; Keller and Berry, 2003; Rogers, 1995) Ensure that innovators and early adopters have a positive experience taking action. Provide them with “show and tell” materials they can use when spreading the word to people in their networks. Ask them to commit to telling others.

Competitions provide an engaging context for considering new actions – even for those who would not otherwise pay attention to your messages. The perceived benefit from helping one’s local community / group win can be enough to engage those who would not otherwise pay attention to your messages. Many types of programs can benefit from adding friendly competition with neighboring communities, particularly where such rivalries already exist. For example, Get Energized, Iowa pitted four communities against one another in a competition to reduce electric and natural gas usage. The program took advantage of the friendly rivalries that already existed among the four rural communities, all of which were members of the same athletic conference for football. One of the program managers noted that initially, organizers were skeptical about using a competitive model but found that it actually worked very well. “Everyone in American culture knows the competition game and how to play it. It also opened up new possibilities for social interaction and was a great way to put social pressure on people to change their behaviors. ... If I walk over to my neighbor's home and suggest that they need a weatherization audit, that

sounds fussy and busybody. But if it's in the context of a competition--that if you cut your energy use you'll help us win the competition and beat our football rival--suddenly it's not considered weird behavior anymore." Similarly, SmartPower challenged 13 Arizona cities to install solar panels on 5% of their homes by 2015. Over half of the towns met that goal and four of them passed 10%. Fear and shame appeals Boosting self efficacy and response efficacy

Fear of negative consequences or shame from inaction can be a powerful motivator; however the use of fear and shame appeals remains controversial. According to Witte’s model for fear appeals (2009), called the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM), people who are faced with a fear appeal can take one of two actions. 1. If they believe an effective response is available (response efficacy) and they can perform this response (self efficacy), these individuals will work to control the danger. This is called danger control. 2. However, if self efficacy and/or response efficacy are low, they instead tend to avoid their feelings of fear rather than contemplating, preparing for and then taking action. This is called fear control. Response may also depend on perceived severity and vulnerability to the risk (Maloney et al, 2011) Fear appeals seem to work best when (1) promoting one-time behaviors, (2) the target audience includes a large percentage of women and (3) the appeals are accompanied by information on realistic steps for avoiding the threat. (Tannenbaum et al., 2015)

Incentives

Use financial and non-financial incentives to draw attention to your communications, the one-time behaviors you are promoting, and the associated benefits. Incentives can also be used to reduce the barriers to taking a next step. For example, the Island Park Sustainable Fire Community offered free wildfire risk evaluations to engage landowners. As another example, Farmlink promoted the availability of conservation compensation programs.

Norm appeals

Show that other people – especially those in one’s network – are benefiting from taking action. Kassirer (2016) provides tips for using norm appeals for forest conservation. In brief:

Social

Liberation*

• Provide clear guidelines / approval for the desired behavior. • Provide markers of participation and group feedback so community members can see who has already acted and the associated benefits they have enjoyed as a result. • Once you have sufficient numbers, tell people the number or proportion of woodland owners that have booked visits with a professional forester. • Build in opportunities for people to share their experiences and other forms of "word-of-mouth" promotion. * Social liberation, as described by Prochaska and DiClemente, includes the above points and also advocacy for change at a societal level, in order to change norms.

Peer networks

Work with woodland advocates / behavior ambassadors, home / farm visits, and/or home parties / tours to reach a wide range of participants who might otherwise not get involved. Case study examples include Climate Change Education in the USA (woodland advocates / behavior ambassadors); the American Tree Farm System, TELE, and WOWnet (home parties / tours); and Driftless and FARMLINK (home / farm visits). For tips on using these approaches to promote forest conservation, see Kassirer (2016).

Tie-ins to disturbances

Take advantage of local disturbances and/or disturbances to personal routines, when people may be particularly open to considering information about their alternative options • Moving / new resident (e.g. Portland’s Smart Trips Welcome) • Local forest fire or fire threat, or a hazardous buildup of underbrush at a particular property (best done when landowners still have time to take action to successfully protect themselves and their forests) • Local pest infestation or infestation threat, or a risky condition at a particular property (best done when landowners still have time to take action to successfully protect their forests) • Significant change in the price of harvested wood

Tie-ins to things that already interest and engage the audience

• Find and then focus on the key benefits / motivators. Common motivators for engaging in forest conservation behaviors have been grouped below, according to three main dimensions of engagement (Kassirer et al, 2014; Kassirer, 2016). Where possible, it is advisable to engage participants through motivations that span at least two and ideally all three of these groupings. 1. Affiliation (“This is who I am”): feeling related to, connection, intimacy, identification, kinship or

relationship, closeness, loyalty, ownership • Following social norms / fitting in / doing the right thing / being a responsible community member / being a responsible neighbor / having a property that appears to be well managed/ contributing to community growth and development • Getting to know other forest owners / social connectivity • Leaving a legacy for children / preserving family heritage / family commitment • Place attachment / attachment to the rural landscape 2. Resonance (“This is right for me”): feeling attracted to, involvement, relevance, sharing values, wanting to learn about • Helping promote forest stewardship /protecting the environment • Place attachment / attachment to the rural landscape • Traditional and spiritual values 3. Enjoyment (“I like this”): feeling good; satisfaction, functional benefits , hedonistic emotions • Aesthetic appreciation / beauty / scenery • Financial investment/ preserving one’s investment in one’s property • Getting help making wise management decisions on one’s property • Income from timber production • Privacy • Reduced hassles and costs associated with owning the land (e.g. taxes, vandalism and trespassing) • Wildlife, often attracting animals for hunting • The reasons why landowners undertake conservation actions will likely vary somewhat depending on the particular behaviors being promoted. In addition, different audience segments may have different motivations for the same behavior; Butler et al. (2007) list four segments based on a hierarchical, multivariate analysis of landowners' attitudes in US Forest Service’s National Woodland Owner Survey data: (1) Woodland Retreat Owners, (2) Working the Land Owners, (3) Supplemental Income Owners, and (4) Ready to Sell Owners. The Sustaining Family Forests Initiative (2016) uses these same segments, except that their fourth segment is called “uninvolved owners.” • Regarding forest fire prevention in the USA, those in the precontemplative stage are motivated by their perceived degree of vulnerability to mitigate the risk.(Martin et al, 2007) • In addition, connect with tie-ins to topics outside of forest

conservation that already engage your audience (e.g. BC Hydro Team Power Smart) Vivid, Personalized, Credible, Empowering Communication Dramatic Relief

Kassirer (2016b) provides tips on how to provide vivid, personalized, credible, empowering communication related to forest conservation. The following are particularly relevant at this stage. Vivid • Evoke lifelike images that are vivid (heard, seen, or felt as if real). • Get people involved emotionally, and encourage them to express feelings (positive and negative) about taking action. Prochaska and DiClemente called this Dramatic Relief. For example, both the Southern New England Heritage Forest program and the Taconic Ridge Partnership program targeted Woodland Retreat Owners with emotional messaging (“You love your woods— what’s their future?” and “I care about my land. How should I care for my woods?”) • Arrange for participants to physically experience the things that illustrate the points you are making through touch, smell, sight and hearing. In forest conservation programs this often involves demonstrations and/or forest walks. • Focus on the key motivators. Stress the benefits that others are already getting – particularly others in one’s network, and the benefits a particular participant can expect. Personalized • Tailor messaging for each target audience (and for each individual where possible). Credible • Ensure that your audience will trust and pay attention to your communications. • Work through respected peer landowner volunteers, for example using one of the peer network approaches discussed in the “peer networks” row above. • Partner with credible community organizations, and balanced groups of interest. For example, FARMLINK partnered with an established local watershed advocacy group; their home advisors were members of that group who were well known and respected locally. • Engage multiple, credible spokespersons, opinion leaders, and channels of communication. • Repeat your message a number of times. Empowering  Provide small first steps to getting involved.

Pitfalls

Commitment, reminder and other action-oriented strategies used at this stage will likely backfire because people aren’t yet ready to act. Save these tools for later stages. If using a fear appeal, ensure that self efficacy and/or response efficacy are high enough or your audience will tend to turn off to your messaging to avoid their feelings of fear (i.e. they will stay in Precontemplation), rather than contemplating, preparing for and then taking action. In that situation you would need to build self efficacy and/or response efficacy first. Alternatively, focus on more positive motivators for taking action. For example, the Island Park Sustainable Fire Community found it was helpful to frame communications in terms of landowners’ connections to their communities and personal safety, focusing on empowerment rather than fear.

4.2.2 Learn – Contemplation

Stage of Change


Learn - Contemplation (Getting Ready; Deliberation, “I might Change”) People at this stage are aware of the risks or problems associated with inaction, and are starting to look at both the pros and cons of alternative behaviors. They are ambivalent about taking action. People at this stage still tend to magnify the barriers to action, so it can be particularly helpful to correct misconceptions, communicate ways you have recently lowered the barriers, and engage people to re-evaluate their barriers and how they could be addressed. At this stage the role of the conservation volunteer is to be like a socratic teacher (asking questions). Develop and maintain a positive relationship, personalize the risk factors, and help the landowner using “if-then” planning to (1) identify and reduce barriers and (2) identify the signs of increased risk indicating that it might be time to prepare for action.


Movement through this stage can be accelerated using the same approaches described for the previous stage (Learn – Precontemplation). In addition, the following approaches are particularly useful. Reducing Specific Barriers

Reduce the key barriers that discourage specific audiences from taking the promoted action(s). People at this stage still tend to magnify the barriers to action, so it can be helpful to correct misconceptions, communicate ways you have recently lowered the barriers, and engage people to re-evaluate their barriers.

Use peer network approaches to overcome landowners’ distrust of government / authority figures such as professional foresters. (See the Peer Networks row in the previous table) Engage people in “if-then” (“what if”) planning to help them identify their likely barriers and find ways to overcome the important ones. Involvement in “if-then” planning for addressing likely barriers can be a strong predictor of movement to the next stage and beyond. (e.g. Shuz, 2008). Vivid, Personalized, Empowering Communication

Recognize participants for related learning activities they have already done – like reading an article or brochure, or signing up for and attending information events. Help them analyze information and draw conclusions about their own woods. As examples from other fields, the Church-Based Peer Led Diabetes Prevention program provided assistance with lab feedback, and Get Energized provided help with retrofit decisions as part of energy efficiency home visits. Show that the benefits are greater than the downsides and that key barriers have been reduced or are at least manageable. Provide small steps that people can take to get more involved.

If-Then Planning

Engage people in “if-then” planning to help them identify the signs of increased risk (e.g. fire risks from excessive undergrowth and pest risk from monocultures or invasive species) that might indicate when it is time to prepare for action. This not only helps them to recognize a problem; it can also increase the likelihood of taking action and reduce the time lag before taking action. Further, this effect tends to persist even in stressful situations (Weiber and Gollwitzer, 2017; Weiber et al., 2015). Regarding forest fire prevention in the USA, low knowledge contemplatives are motivated by their perceived degree of vulnerability to mitigate the risk. In contrast, high knowledge contemplatives' potential behavioral changes are more likely to be motivated by increasing their perceptions of the severity of the risk. (Martin et al, 2007)

Pitfalls

People at this stage are just starting to pay attention to forest conservation or the action being promoted. They have not yet figured out if and how they will respond. If they think that the barriers are too high and that they might not be able to do the behavior, or that it might be a negative experience, they can easily slip back to pre-contemplation. To avoid

this pitfall, show that the benefits are greater than the downsides, and that key barriers have been reduced. Engage people in “what-if planning” to help them watch for signs of increased risk (indicating it is time to prepare for action) and overcome key barriers. If using a fear appeal, ensure that self efficacy and/or response efficacy are high enough. If they aren’t, your audience will tend to turn off to your messaging to avoid their feelings of fear (i.e. they will revert to Precontemplation), rather than contemplating, preparing for and then taking action. In such situations you need to build self efficacy and/or response efficacy first. Alternatively, focus on positive motivators for taking action. For example, the Island Park Sustainable Fire Community found it was helpful to frame communications in terms of landowners’ connections to their communities and personal safety, focusing on empowerment rather than fear. Commitment and reminder strategies used at this stage are likely to backfire because people aren’t yet ready to act. Save these tools for later stages.

Case Study Examples Key Insights from Selected Case Studies Case Study American Tree Farm System Case Study: Oregon

Key Insights and Lessons Learned 



Climate Change Education in the USA In support of Al Gore’s Climate Project, the National



Supporting Evidence

Personal social networks have important roles both in attracting and in maintaining participation; applying social network analysis rigorously could help to determine the central nodes of forester networks, which in many cases may not be the organizational nodes. A rich connection to the land; a desire to build community; and connections to foresters, other tree farm owners and tree farm inspectors were all crucial factors in decisions to take next steps.



DJ case interviewed six randomly selected tree farm participants by phone. “This small pool of interviews can in no way be seen as definitive or representative, yet these interviews begin to reveal the experience of tree farmers on the ground and the impact of the tree farm system on farmers’ lives.” (DJ Case and Associates, 2016)

Hunters and anglers were better reached through meetings with their organizations and clubs than through formal presentations.



Trainees were asked to make ten presentations each, within the first year of being trained, and were supplied with a digital slide presentation and an accompanying curriculum and

Case Study

Key Insights and Lessons Learned

Wildlife Federation (NWF) trained 5,000 influential leaders between 2007 and 2010 to serve as voices for both personal and civic actions on climate and for broader policy reforms at the local, state and national levels.



Farmlink



One-to-one peer outreach was used within a targeted watershed to promote the installation of conservation buffers.



Get Energized Iowa!



This program pitted four communities against one another in a competition to reduce electric and natural gas usage. Program organizers worked with local guide teams in each community.





This program fosters

handbook on climate change. NWF initially focused on environmentallyminded civic and organizational leaders, then went on to target leaders among less likely allies such as hunters and anglers. Coyle (2010) documents the program and lessons learned.

For them, the degree of trust in the messenger mattered as much or more than the details of the science. Invoking their keen observations of the natural world helped engage them.

Landowners generally seemed to like the personal touch of someone coming out to talk directly with them. Working with an established watershed “advocacy” group helped. They helped recruit their members to staff the program and they had already done some ‘spadework’ informing the community about and raising interest in conservation issues.



Four local landowner “advisors”, hired on a part-time basis, conducted farm visits with 42 landowners. Twentyeight of the landowners who were contacted signed an Intent to Participate form. Three of these individuals almost immediately visited the local NRCS field office to begin the process of contract preparation, practice design, and installation. (Shelton et al, 2009)

Competitions between rural communities that are natural rivals can help engage people who might not otherwise participate. Local guide teams can establish instant credibility and access to community networks.



The program used a survey questionnaire before and after intervention, verified through a small number of interviews. Organizers directly measured total residential gas and electric usage (adjusted for degree days and occupancy changes) To measure the persistence of changes found, organizers resurveyed the four communities and recollected energy data up to 17 months after the competition. The organizers presented a webinar on their experiences – now also a written case study (Kassirer, 2017a; www.toolsofchange.com/en/case-studies/detail/691)





Energy use was reduced by up to 15% community-wide and the reduction persisted a year after the competition.

Portland’s Smart Trips Welcome

Supporting Evidence



 

On average 15% of the U.S. population moves each year It is possible to purchases inexpensive mailing lists of resi-



This program’s most recent evaluation relied on pre- and post-surveys with the target audience (N=5,400) as well as a control group (N=1,352). In all, there

Case Study environmentally-friendly and active transportation habits among new city residents. Participants receive individualized follow-up through phone calls as well as tailored emails and newsletters.




dents that live in particular zip codes and that have moved in the last six months. A series of three eye-catching mailers, combined with relevant incentives, was able to attract sign-ups.

Supporting Evidence





As a result, the city’s new residents took 10% fewer drive-alone trips and the proportion of their trips taken by green and active methods increased by 14%. 

were 953 target audience baseline responses (18% response rate) and 230 control baseline responses (17% response rate.) A one-year follow up looked at long-term program impacts using a longitudinal panel study. Target residents were encouraged to order materials online where they were asked to fill out a trip diary and survey questionnaire. After implementing the individualized marketing component and providing continued encouragement and reinforcement throughout the year, participants were then issued the same survey one year later. In 2011 the panel survey was sent to 356 participants and 56 responded (16% response rate.) The organizers presented a webinar on their experiences – now also a written case study (Kassirer, 2017a; www.toolsofchange.com/en/case-studies/detail/658)

Smart Power



Providing a financial incentive for people to host parties and sell solar panels to their friends and neighbors helped break down some of the barriers encountered in the past.



Over half of the towns met the 10% goal and four of them surpassed it. Meagher (2013) documents program experience.



Because energy conservation is low-priority and lowinvolvement for most BC residents, the program learned to connect with participants through things they already care about. It was helpful to create a messaging grid that connects each targeted behavior with the topics that people already cared about, as well as key barriers and motivators. It is possible to build engagement incrementally using a “loyalty program’ approach. BC Hydro found it helpful to increase participants’ engage-



BC Hydro conducted formal program impact evaluations for each fiscal year. To estimate energy savings, it compared the amount of energy used in participating households before and after the fiscal year using a quasiexperimental design. About 50,000 participating households were successfully pair matched each year for this analysis. BC Hydro monitored behavior changes through surveys, with separate samples of participants and nonparticipants.

This program challenged 13 Arizona cities to install solar panels on 5% of their homes by 2015. Team Power Smart Team Power Smart offers participants the opportunity to participate in successive 12-month challenges and earn a small reward if they reduce energy consumption by 10% or more, calendar normalized, and weather normalized. 





Kassirer et al (2014)

Case Study






Tools for Engaging Landowners Effectively (TELE)  Both the Southern New England Heritage Forest program and the Taconic Ridge Partnership program targeted Woodland Retreat Owners with similar key messag-





Supporting Evidence

ment levels on three dimensions: Enjoyment (“I like this”), Affiliation (“This is who I am”), and Resonance (“This is right for me”). A small incentive attracted people’s attention to the challenge. The challenge reward was originally $75 but was subsequently reduced to $50 after conducting a sensitivity analysis. The decision to provide a cash incentive was not taken lightly. Rewarding repetitive behaviors can under some circumstances undermine intrinsic motivation so that when the incentive is removed, the behavior may revert back to or even drop below the previous level. Another potential drawback of incentives is that their action tends to be specific to the behaviors being promoted; they generally don’t spill over to other behaviors. To avoid these pitfalls, BC Hydro set a relatively low incentive, awarded it only once at the end of every 12-month challenge for completing the challenge successfully rather than for doing a specific behavior, and promoted it as just one of the various tangible and intangible benefits from adopting the desired behaviors. A combination of outreach methods / channels (rather than just one or two methods / channels), and contacting landowners multiple times rather than just once, produced the best results. Website postings and social media did not seem to be significant factors in attracting at-



Five different TELE case studies document the results of trying a variety of approaches to further engage landowners. (TELE, 2016; www.engaginglandowners.org/)

Case Study es (“You love your woods—what’s their future?” and “I care about my land. How should I care for my woods?”)  The Island Park Sustainable Fire Community separately targeted fulltime residents, summer seasonal residents, and property managers with messages focused on landowners’ connections to their communities and personal safety.  The Monadnock and Ausbon Sargent projects (covered in the Quabbin to Cardigan case study) targeted Woodland Retreat landowners; the former also targeted ‘Working the Land’ owners via printed material, workshops, and a demonstration forest.


















tendees. Electronic invitations were not successful because they were less personalized and did not account for some landowners’ lack of technical expertise. Postcard mailings were generally less effective than a nature column in the local weekly paper. Phone calls and face-toface contact from model landowners and well-connected staff members were the most convincing communication channels. That said, the Island Park Sustainable Fire Community used a postcard mailing successfully. It focused on protecting one’s property and community, and offered a free risk evaluation. The Woods Forums attracted older rather than middle-aged participants. Having local partners (like members of a local conservation commission or specific landowners) host forums attracted more landowners. Informal peer-to-peer chats with refreshments were more likely to attract landowners than formal lectures from experts. The Island Park Sustainable Fire Community found it was helpful to frame communications in terms of landowners’ connections to their communities and personal safety, focusing on empowerment rather than fear. The Island Park Sustainable Fire Community found that the barriers to action included perceived cost and effort as well as low response efficacy (many landowners thought their actions would not really mini-

Supporting Evidence

Case Study


Supporting Evidence

mize the risk of a fire).

Further Notes on the Case Studies 

Church-Based Peer Led Diabetes Prevention Program. This program provided Peer Lifestyle Coaches (PLCs) with (1) one 8 hour training session with a certified diabetes educator, (2) a 2 hour booster session and (3) bi-weekly emails for three months prior to the start of the intervention. The PLC training program addressed several key areas, including: (1) developing empowerment-based facilitation, active listening, and behavior change skills; (2) learning selfmanagement strategies (e.g., reading food labels, counting calories); (3) practicing session delivery; and (4) interpreting clinical lab results. Tang et al (2012 and 2014).



Climate Change Education in the USA. Hunters and anglers were much less likely to want to go out and give a formal presentation and were instead more inclined to rely on a tradition of talking things over at meetings with their organization or club. The degree of trust in the messenger mattered as much or more than the details of the science. The pre-packaged slide presentations and accompanying slide-by-slide guides were not much used. Relying on participants’ keen observations of the natural world, organizers introduced discussions into training programs asking trainees to reflect on changes to the natural environment and wildlife patterns that they had personally observed in recent years. Despite skepticism that “was often thick in the air at first ... (once) the trainees began to describe their own observations and experiences, (the) mood shifted to be more positive and even enthusiastic.” (Coyle, 2010)

4.3 Moving People towards Action: the Preparation Stage Stage of Change


Preparation (Ready; Planning; Intention; “I will change”)

People at this stage are preparing to take action in the immediate future and may already have undertaken small steps in that direction. They already see that the benefits are worth the costs. These are the people who should be recruited for action-oriented engagement approaches. They are particularly influenced by setting goals, ways of reducing the barriers, learning new or substitute behaviors, making a commitment to take action, and by helping relationships. This is the stage at which landowners meet with a professional forester. At this stage, the role of the forester and conservation volunteers is to be like an experienced coach.


Feedback and Recognition Reinforcement Management Goal Setting Obtaining a Commitment (SelfLiberation)

Recognize the steps the person has taken and /or is taking to prepare for action, like reading a brochure, asking for information, attending a home party, booking a home visit with a conservation volunteer, and arranging to meet with a professional forester.

This is the earliest stage of change at which commitment strategies should be used. Any earlier and the person is not really ready to act and may be put off rather than encouraged. Written pledges are stronger and last longer than oral ones; public pledges are stronger and last longer than private ones If appropriate, ask for a number of increasingly demanding agreements over time. It has been shown that agreeing to a small request can lead people to agree later to much larger ones. Participating in a conservation home party or forest conservation presentation makes people more likely to host one; participating in a home visit, hosting a house party or being a conservation block leader makes people more likely to likely to do the targeted conservation behaviors. For example, the Quabbin to Cardigan TELE case study (The Sustaining Family Forests Initiative, 2016) first

engaged landowners to attend a Woods Forum, then to agree to be contacted afterwards, then to have a Home Visit, then to conserve their land. See Kassirer (2016b) for commitment and reminder tips relevant to forest conservation. Helping Relationships

Peer Networks can empower neighbors to identify and overcome specific barriers to action, and to learn to do new actions (Kassirer, 2016b). Loyalty Club -type approaches can also help members to reduce the barriers to action, learn new or substitute behaviors, set goals and make a commitment to take action. Team PowerSmart illustrates this approach.

Norm Appeals

Show that other people – especially those in one’s network – are benefiting from taking action. Kassirer (2016b) provides tips for using norm appeals for forest conservation. In brief: • Provide clear guidelines / approval for the desired behavior(s) • Provide markers of participation so community members can see who has already acted • Build in opportunities for people to share their experiences and other forms of "word-of-mouth" promotion • Ensure that descriptive and injunctive norms are mutually supportive rather than cancelling each other out

Peer Networks

Home / Farm Visits and Block Leaders / Neighborhood Coaches are particularly useful in providing helping relationships that empower neighbors to identify and overcome specific barriers to action, and to learn to do new actions. (Kassirer, 2016b)

Personalized, Empowering Communication

To boost self efficacy (“I can do this”): help overcome the barriers to action, show others taking action successfully, provide access to financial and technical assistance programs, provide individual and group feedback and norm appeals, and promote word of mouth communication. (Kassirer, 2017b)

Group Feedback Reducing Specific Barriers Boosting Self

To boost response efficacy (predictable outcome / taking action makes a difference): provide individual and group feedback; make your target audience part of a winning effort, not “the bad guy”; and celebrate wins. For example, Get Energized Iowa provided group feedback in the context of a friendly competition. (Kassirer, 2017b)

efficacy and Response efficacy

Pitfalls

Prompts

This is the earliest stage of change at which reminders should be used. Any earlier and the person is not really ready to act and may be put off rather than encouraged. Periodically remind woodland owners to consider their levels of risk (e.g. density of old, dry underbrush; levels of targeted pests / alien species) and if action is warranted. Remind them of their “if-then” planning scenarios. This could be tied to an annual campaign and/or an annual activity that landowners are already doing on their lands – for example, each spring and/or fall as part of their regular maintenance routines.

Tie-ins to disturbances

Take advantage of episodic disturbances that might trigger their “ifthen” actions. Do this when landowners still have time to take action to successfully protect themselves and their forests. • Local forest fire or fire threat, or if a hazardous buildup of underbrush at a particular property is detected during an inspection ort audit • Local pest infestation or infestation threat, or if a risky condition at a particular property is detected during an inspection or audit • Significant change in the price of harvested wood

People at this stage are still preparing to change. If key barriers have not been overcome, and if it looks like it will be too difficult to take action (low self efficacy), to have an impact (low response efficacy) and/or cope with the changes (low coping planning), people can get frustrated and easily slip back to one of the two Learn stages. (Shuz et al., 2008) This can be countered by reducing the perceived barriers, providing helping relationships, and helping the landowner to (1) learn how to do any new or substitute behaviors, (2) make a commitment to take action, and (3) set goals. To avoid undermining intrinsic motivation, make sure participants perceive your feedback as helpful information not as an attempt to control their behavior.

Case Study Examples Key Insights from Selected Case Studies

Case Study American Tree Farm System Case Study: Oregon




Farmlink



A one-to-one peer outreach was used within a targeted watershed to promote the installation of conservation buffers. 




This program fosters environmentally-friendly and active transportation habits among new city residents.



Participants order free materials to help them prepare for and try the targeted behaviors. Each order includes a thank you letter, a pledge form, a local area coupon sheet, as well as the





Supporting Evidence

A rich connection to the land, a desire to build community, and connections to foresters, other tree farm owners and sometimes tree farm inspectors were all crucial factors in decisions to take next steps. Participants mainly took their advice for forestry decisions from those they knew personally and had worked with over time.




At this stage, it is important to focus on practice adoption, rather than merely creating an awareness of a problem. This shift was supported by having the landowner sign a non-binding Intent to Participate form to indicate his/her interest. Encouraging landowners to visit the local field office to sign a practice installation contract was another effective way of encouraging adoption.



Four advisors conducted on-farm visits with a total of 42 landowners. Twenty-eight of the landowners who were contacted signed an Intent to Participate form. Three of these individuals almost immediately visited the local field office to begin the process of contract preparation, practice design, and installation.

Using a variety of channels and approaches was effective in engaging participants to take action. Delivering materials by hand allowed for providing face-to-face assistance. Phone calls two weeks after delivery gave participants the chance to ask questions and for program staff to provide support and encouragement. While these calls were well received they were time consuming. It was possible to segment the au-



This program relied on pre- and post-surveys with the target audience (N=5,400) as well as a control group (N=1,352). In all, there were 953 target audience baseline responses (18% response rate) and 230 control baseline responses (17% response rate.) A one-year follow up looked at long-term program impacts using a longitudinal panel study. Target residents were encouraged to order materials online where



Case Study


information that the resident has specifically requested.

Supporting Evidence

dience into nine groups, and then send customized and personal emails to each participant, encouraging behavior changes specific to them.



Team Power Smart Team Power Smart offers participants the opportunity to participate in successive 12month challenges and earn a small reward if they reduce energy consumption by 10% or more, calendar normalized, and weather normalized.







It is possible to build engagement incrementally using a “loyalty program’ approach. Test your incentives. The challenge reward was originally $75 but was subsequently reduced to $50 after conducting a sensitivity analysis. The decision to provide a cash incentive was not taken lightly. Rewarding repetitive behaviors can under some circumstances undermine intrinsic motivation so that when the incentive is removed, the behavior may revert back to or even drop below the previous level. Another potential drawback of incentives is that their action tends to be specific to the behaviors being promoted; they generally don’t spill over to other behaviors. To avoid these pitfalls, BC Hydro set a relatively low incentive, awarded it only once at the end of every 12month challenge for completing the challenge successfully rather than for doing a specific behavior, and promoted it as just one of the various tangible and intangible benefits from adopting the desired behaviors.





they were asked to fill out a trip diary and survey questionnaire. After implementing the individualized marketing component and providing continued encouragement and reinforcement throughout the year, participants were then issued the same survey one year later. In 2011 the panel survey was sent to 356 participants and 56 responded (16% response rate.) The organizers presented a webinar on their experiences – now also a written case study (Kassirer, 2017a) BC Hydro conducted formal program impact evaluations for each fiscal year. To estimate energy savings, it compared the amount of energy used in participating households before and after the fiscal year using a quasi-experimental design. About 50,000 participating households were successfully pair matched each year for this analysis. BC Hydro monitored behavior changes through surveys, with separate samples of participants and non-participants. (Kassirer et al, 2014)

Case Study


Supporting Evidence

TELE

 The Island Park Sustainable Fire Community found that the barriers to action included perceived cost and effort as well as low response efficacy (many landowners thought their actions would not really minimize the risk of a fire.)

 Five different TELE case studies document the results of trying a variety of approaches to further engage landowners. (TELE, 2016)

 Both the Southern New England Heritage Forest program and the Taconic Ridge Partnership program targeted Woodland Retreat Owners with similar key messages (“You love your woods—what’s their future?” and “I care about my land. How should I care for my woods?”)  The Island Park Sustainable Fire Community separately targeted full-time residents, summer seasonal residents, and property managers with messages focused on landowners’ connections to their communities and personal safety.  The Monadnock and Ausbon Sargent projects (covered in the Quabbin to Cardigan case study) targeted Woodland Retreat landowners; the former also targeted ‘Working the Land’ owners via printed material, workshops, and a demonstration forest.

 People responded well when listening to peer “expert” landowners as they led forest walks, and it was effective to have these landowners invite people in their own networks.  Small, super-targeted follow-up events worked well and helped landowners who were ready to take the next step.

4.4 The Act Stage: where to next? People in the “Act” Stage are already taking action on their lands in ways that directly improve forest management. These are usually one time actions, or if repeated it may be years between each repetition. In fact, it can take a year or more to complete some actions, because many land actions have long lead times and/or seasonality to when they can be completed. AFF is interested in helping people continue to take conservation actions on their land, as appropriate, and also to gradually take on conservation leadership roles within their communities. In addition, AFF wants people who have already taken conservation actions on their land to do so again in the future when appropriate. Those at this stage are particularly influenced by additional opportunities to take action and by helping relationships.

Stage of Change


Act - Action (Did it / doing it; “I am changing / have changed”) Already taking action on their lands in ways that directly improve forest management. At this stage the role of the conservation volunteer is to be like a consultant with expert advice, and to provide helpful and motivational feedback.

Approaches for Ensuring or Accelerating Movement Toward Further Actions

Regarding forest fire mitigation in the USA, further risk-mitigating behaviors undertaken by high knowledge action homeowners are influenced by their perceptions of risk severity, self efficacy, and response efficacy. In contrast, low-knowledge action homeowners engage in further risk reduction behaviors without the influence of any of these variables, demonstrating their motivation to emulate others in their community. (Martin et al, 2007) Personal Challenges, Incentives, Goal Setting

Help participants establish and/or connect with a broader interest in / intention to actively manage or conserve the trees on their property.

Self-Liberation

Use personal challenges, small incentives, goal setting and commitments to help participants consider and take further actions. (e.g. Team Power Smart, TELE)

Feedback and Recognition

Recognize participants for their achievements. (e.g. Get Energized Iowa!, Team PowerSmart; TELE)

Reinforcement Management Norm Appeals

Norm appeals may be particularly important for low-knowledge action homeowners (as found in the case of forest fire prevention; Martin et al, 2007). Show that other people – especially significant others and those in one’s broader network – are doing the additional targeted behaviors. Kassirer (2016b) provides tips for using norm appeals for forest conservation. In brief: • Provide clear guidelines / approval for the desired behavior(s) • Provide markers of participation and group feedback so community members can see who has already acted and the associated benefits they have enjoyed as a result. • Build in opportunities for people to share their experiences and other forms of word-of-mouth promotion • Ensure that descriptive and injunctive norms are mutually supportive rather than cancelling each other out

Peer Networks Helping Relationships

All of the peer-network strategies discussed in Kassirer (2016b) involve some local landowners in playing a leadership role, being recognized in front of their peers, and/or taking next steps. These can all reinforce having taken a new action like contacting a professional forester. Home / Farm Visits and Block Leaders / Neighborhood Coaches are particularly useful in providing helping relationships that empower neighbors to learn to do new or substitute behaviors and overcome any associated barriers. (e.g. TELE, WOWnet)

Feedback Personalized, Empowering Communication Reducing Specific Barriers Boosting Self

To boost self efficacy, help overcome the barriers to ‘next-step’ actions. Consider providing: instruction; assistance; demonstrations; and recommended steps, products and suppliers. Increase trialability (e.g. provide free samples, loaners or shortterm rentals) and show others doing the targeted conservation measures successfully (as with Home Visits and Home Parties), provide access to financial and technical assistance programs, individual and group feedback, norm appeals, and promote word of mouth communication. Feedback and Norm Appeals are discussed in more detail in their own rows, above.

efficacy and Response efficacy

To boost response efficacy (predictable outcome / actions make a difference) provide individual and group feedback; make your target audience part of a winning effort, not “the bad guy”; and celebrate wins. For example, Get Energized Iowa provided group feedback in the context of a friendly competition.

CounterConditioning

Encourage participants to notice, remember and be influenced by positive experiences (e.g. with a forester and local forest conservation organizations) in order to counter-condition prevailing conditioning (distrust and preconceptions about conservation actions and authority figures). Another example would be to help participants change their mindsets about what a healthy forest looks like. Such counter-conditioning supports taking further steps. Foster the development of groups such as WOWnet that can counter-condition a sense of exclusion among and further engage significant audience segments that are under-represented.

Pitfalls

Old patterns and behaviors may slip back. For example, the participant may have had a bad experience when taking action, or may just lose interest and not work with a forester again. The following approaches can help counter regression to earlier stages. 





Monitor participant satisfaction, so that you catch negative experiences (situations) and issues as early as possible. Provide landowners with opportunities to provide you with confidential, direct feedback, and also seek feedback from participating foresters and organizations. Ask participating foresters and organizations to flag and let you know about people who had a negative experience; also supply these foresters and organizations with (and ask them to give participants) an invitation to provide confidential feedback. Track all negative situations and issues in one centrally managed table or database. Address each negative situation individually; address issues through program modification and/or training. Highlight program benefits using individual and group feedback and continue recognizing actions already taken. To avoid undermining intrinsic motivation, make sure your participants perceive your feedback as helpful information not as an attempt to control their behavior; and provide feedback when they are not expecting it Provide financial and non-financial incentives for taking next steps.

Changes in forest, economic, social or other conditions, as well as changes in stage of life, marital status and use of the land may impact the relative importance of barriers and motivators, what the landowner is willing to do and why. To minimize regression to earlier stages, segment landowners, build individualized relationships, monitor for such changes, and adjust the tact of (personalized) communications accordingly as necessary.

Case Study Examples Key Insights from Selected Case Studies

Case Study


Supporting Evidence

American Tree Farm System Case Study: Oregon



Some Tree Farm participants went on to take leadership roles in promoting forest conservation to others in their communities.







Monthly newsletters during the program provided reinforcement and encouragement, and helped maintain interest.



This program relied on pre- and post-surveys with the target audience (N=5,400) as well as a control group (N=1,352). In all, there were 953 target audience baseline responses (18% response rate) and 230 control baseline responses (17% response rate.) A one-year follow up looked at long-term program impacts using a longitudinal panel study. Target residents were encouraged to order materials online where they were asked to fill out a trip diary and survey questionnaire. After implementing the individualized marketing component and providing continued encouragement and reinforcement throughout the year, participants were then issued the same survey one year later. In 2011 the panel survey was sent to 356 participants and 56 responded (16% response rate.) The organizers presented a webinar on their experiences – now also a written case study (Kassirer, 2017a)

This program fosters environmentally-friendly and active transportation habits among new city residents.





Case Study Team Power Smart


Team Power Smart offers participants the opportunity to participate in successive 12month challenges and earn a small reward if they reduce energy consumption by 10% or more, calendar normalized, and weather normalized.

TELE  Both the Southern New England Heritage Forest program and the Taconic Ridge Partnership program targeted Woodland Retreat Owners with similar key messages (“You love your woods— what’s their future?” and “I care about my land. How should I care for my woods?”)  The Island Park Sustainable Fire Community separately targeted full-time residents, summer seasonal residents, and property managers with messages focused on land-

 

Supporting Evidence

A small incentive for continuing to take action can be helpful under certain circumstance. As it matured, this program introduced a $25 annual incentive for maintaining energy reductions. The decision to provide a cash incentive was not taken lightly. Rewarding repetitive behaviors can under some circumstances undermine intrinsic motivation so that when the incentive is removed, the behavior may revert back to or even drop below the previous level. Another potential drawback of incentives is that their action tends to be specific to the behaviors being promoted; they generally don’t spill over to other behaviors. To avoid these pitfalls, BC Hydro set a relatively low incentive, awarded it only once at the end of every 12-month challenge for maintaining energy reductions rather than for doing a specific behavior, and promoted it as just one of the various tangible and intangible benefits from adopting the desired behaviors.



Encourage participants to take on increasingly demanding actions The “Quabbin to Cardigan” cases study reports on two projects that first engaged landowners to attend a Woods Forum, then to agree to be contacted afterwards, then to have a Home Visit, then to conserve their land.





BC Hydro conducted formal program impact evaluations for each fiscal year. To estimate energy savings, it compared the amount of energy used in participating households before and after the fiscal year using a quasi-experimental design. About 50,000 participating households were successfully pair matched each year for this analysis. BC Hydro monitored behavior changes through surveys, with separate samples of participants and non-participants. Kassirer et al, 2014)

Five different TELE case studies document the results of trying a variety of approaches to further engage landowners. (TELE, 2016)

Case Study


Supporting Evidence

owners’ connections to their communities and personal safety.  The Monadnock and Ausbon Sargent projects (covered in the Quabbin to Cardigan case study) targeted Woodland Retreat landowners; the former also targeted ‘Working the Land’ owners via printed material, workshops, and a demonstration forest. Women Owning Woodlands Networks (WOWnet)  These networks have developed to counter a perceived lack of acceptance and relevance of outreach materials to those who do not consider themselves traditional forest or timber managers.



Tailored support structures can be developed to further engage promising but underserved audience segments that may have already taken a first step.



Muth et al (2013) summarizes experiences using this approach. In four years the program grew to include 300 members in nine counties in Oregon, holding between 24 – 36 programs per year. At a national level, many other states, including Minnesota and Pennsylvania have been looking to the Oregon WOWnet as a model to develop their own programs.

5. Measuring Movement from One Stage to the Next 5.1 Introduction Making provisions for monitoring and evaluating over your program’s life cycle allows you to identify and avoid weaknesses and pitfalls, refine your strategy on an ongoing basis, and obtain optimal results with given resources. It also helps you demonstrate impacts and cost-effectiveness, and garner support to continue your program. Decide how you will monitor and evaluate program achievements during program planning, well before you start program implementation. Ideally, you will want to measure movement from one stage to the next for each promoted behavior, for each target audience.

5.2 Measures The following criteria can be used to determine the stage of change for an individual regarding a new or substitute behavior. Note that appropriate time periods need to be determined. These will likely vary depending on the behavior(s) and audiences involved. This can involve an assessment of past experience (e.g. as recorded by other programs in the past and/or interviews with experts who know the audience well regarding the targeted behavior). It can also involve primary research with the target audience and/or secondary research with your target audience or similar groups of people.

Criteria for Determining Stage of Change Stage Precontemplation

Criteria No intention to act in the foreseeable future

Examples of Measures Number of people who do not respond to your communications

Not considering taking action Contemplation

No intention to act in the foreseeable future Considering doing the one-time behavior

Number of people who (at most):  respond to a survey  request written information materials  sign up for e-tips

Stage

Criteria

Examples of Measures  sign up for MLP  attend an informational event

Preparation

Intention and/or planning to act in the foreseeable future May already have undertaken small steps in that direction

Number of people who (at most):  request a visit with an untrained peer/neighbor  attend a workshop  request to meet with a trained expert (forester, biologist, trained landowner, natural resources professional)  request information about financial or technical assistance (inc. cost share)  request a stewardship or management plan  map their land through MLP  develop MLP goals, activities and task lists

Action

Has already done the targeted one-time action

Number of people who:  complete specific parcel actions that meet project goals  have had cost share applications accepted and paid (pending F/U surveys, info from NRCS partner or forester)  also host an event on their property  also become an ambassador for a neighbor network  are completing MLP activities and tasks  join Tree Farm (in ATFS)

5.3 Data Collection Data collection involves gathering and measuring information on your indicators. In general, direct observation and measurement of targeted behaviors provide the most reliable information. If they are not practical for all of your program participants, use a representative sample and triangulate (see section 5.5, below) to increase confidence in your findings. If none of these options are feasible, use selfreporting and be sure to triangulate. The following are commonly used data collection strategies, based on DJ Case and Associates (2016); Kueper et al (2014); and Shelton et al (2009). Direct Observation or Measurement  Numbers of program participants contacting and/or arranging for a visit with a professional forester  Input from advisory or steering committees who have observed participants  Review of related Intent to Participate forms, management plans, contracts, inspection data and audit reports Self-Reporting  Annual or multi-year surveys  Focus group discussions with participants.  On-site surveys, interviews and discussions at events (this was the most commonly used)

5.4 Questionnaire Validation When program planning and impact measurement rely heavily on attributed movements between stages of change, it is critical that the Stages of Change model actually fits well for your behavior(s) and audiences, and that your data accurately reflect what you are trying to measure. One criticism of Prochaska and diClemente’s Stages of Change model is that the lines between the stages can be somewhat arbitrary. Another is that the questionnaires that are used to assign people to one stage or another are not always standardized or validated. (Lamorte, 2016). This section speaks to these areas of criticism. The following table provides a brief summary of how questionnaires are commonly standardized and validated. Relevant examples of use are listed in the second table

Common Questionnaire Standardization and Validation Testing For Face Validity

Content Validity

Purpose Checks if the questionnaire makes sense to those reading it Checks if each question is directly relevant (“essential”) to what you are trying to

Common Testing Approaches  Interview your audience  Pilot test the survey 

Ask experts (who know forest conservation and rural landowners well) to read and evaluate the survey

Testing For Construct Validity

Internal Consistency

Stability (Concurrent or test-retest reliability)

Purpose measure Validates what your survey is really measuring Checks the internal consistency between responses to questions that are measuring the same factors Checks if your questions measure the same things in a person, when asked at different times

Common Testing Approaches  Lawshe test for Content Validity Ratio (CVR)  Principal Components Analysis (PCA) 

Cronbach’s Alpha (CA) is commonly used



Administer the questionnaire twice to the same set of respondents o The time interval between the two times should be long enough for people to have forgotten their first responses but short enough so that they haven’t changed (usually 2-6 weeks) o Compare responses, for example by graphing the paired differences in responses to each question / item

Recent Examples The following articles describe some recent examples of standardization and validation studies related to stages of change interventions. Study Andres et al (2011)

Topic area and Study Purpose Weight management Conducted to validate a questionnaire designed to assess process change in line with the Transtheoretical Model.

Danneker Physical exercise et al (2003) Conducted to assess the validity of a stages of change measure of the Transtheoretical Model for exercise behavior

Approach and Results Applied Principal Components Analysis to half the sample and identified four key processes of change. Carried out a confirmatory factor analysis with the other half of the sample. The study identified processes of change involved in weight management and found that the questionnaire was adequate. It also revealed the relationship between processes and stages of change and other external variables. 152 university students completed processes of change, self efficacy, decisional balance, stages of change, and exercise behavior questionnaires as well as a maximal treadmill test. The hypothesized patterns of stage differences were only partially supported. Failure to obtain full support may have been due to methodological issues or inherent difficulties in detecting evidence for the validity of stages of change measures.

Study Emani et al (2016)

Topic area and Study Purpose Compliance with periodontal treatments Conducted to assess whether the Transtheoretical Model and oral hygiene behavior are interrelated in theoretically consistent directions

Maruf et al. (2017)

Wood et al (2016)

Physical activity This study explored the Transtheoretical Model in relation to physical activity behavior among Nigerians with essential hypertension Heart failure This study developed and validated a questionnaire to assess knowledge of and stages of change related to a low-sodium diet in heart failure patients

Additional Reading Validating a Questionnaire (Collingridge, 2014)

Approach and Results Selected patients (N=150) answered four questionnaires based on the Transtheoretical Model (TTM), and were divided accordingly into five stages. Then, each patient was given four appointments for their periodontal treatment spaced with a time gap of 10 days. Compliance was assessed using TTM. Higher pro scores for decisional balance, self efficacy, and process of change were recorded in the maintenance group followed by the action group, preparation group, contemplation group, and precontemplation group respectively. In contrast, higher cons scores were recorded in the precontemplation group followed by the contemplation group, preparation group, action group, and maintenance group, respectively. The difference scores of TTM constructs were statistically highly significant between all the five groups. Furthermore, more appointments were attended by the maintenance group, followed by the action group, preparation group, contemplation group, and precontemplation group. Those with the highest levels of physical activity had higher processes of change scores, and those in more advanced stages of change had greater self efficacy, and relied more on cognitive processes of change, but had worse barrier to benefit ratios.

Content validity: 70% agreement among 11 experts Face validity: 100% readability by 16 patients Feasibility: pilot surveys took less than 10min. to complete Internal Consistency: high scores using the KuderRichardson formula for dichotomous responses, with 84 additional patients

5.5 Research Design Research design involves several subtopics including triangulation, setting a baseline and attribution.

Setting a Baseline Obtain baseline data while conducting formative research or as soon as possible thereafter. For each behavior that you are working to change and for each of your key primary audiences, determine the percentage of people at each stage of change before you start your intervention.

Triangulation What alternative ways of looking at your audience will you use, to ensure you are getting a clear and consistent picture? When tracking actions taken, you might audit the management plans, contracts and/or conservation practices of a small number of program participants, in order to check the reliability of survey findings. For example, Tang et al’s Church-Based Peer Led Diabetes Prevention Program illustrates the use of a combination of self-reported and directly measured data. When tracking intentions to act, you might interview a small number of program participants and/or key informants (experts) who know them well, in order to check the reliability of survey findings.

Attribution How will you determine the portion of the observed changes that were caused by your program, versus the portion resulting from other influences? Kassirer (2016b) briefly reviews alternative options such as Experimental Designs, Quasi-Experimental Designs, Staggered Baseline Designs, and Dose Response.

6. Context and Methodology AFF has been working to engage woodland owners in sustainable forest management for 75 years through the American Tree Farm System. For the last five years it has tried to reach unengaged landowners through social marketing and other behavior change strategies. One of the key behaviors being promoted is for each woodland owner to contact a professional forester to help with woodland conservation This is considered a one-time action because it may be years between the times a small woodland owner needs to contact a forester for help. AFF’s current interventions are largely based on Prochaska and DiClemente’s Stages of Change Theory (Transtheoretical Model). AFF commissioned this report so it could learn and document how to accelerate the movement from one stage of change to the next. A literature review was conducted using Google, Google Scholar, WWW, Cochrane, Research Gate, Cochrane Database, cbsm.com, AFF and Cullbridge libraries. The key words / terms used in the searches included:            

Accelerating behavior change Case study Conservation Fear appeal Landowner Prochaska Questionnaire validation Shame appeal Small woodland owners Stage of change Stages of change Transtheoretical

7. References Armitage, C. & Arden, M. (2008). How useful are the stages of change for targeting interventions? Randomized test of a brief intervention to reduce smoking. Health psychology, 27 (6), p. 789. Butler, P., Green, K. & Galvin, D. (2013). The Principles of Pride: The science behind the mascots. Arlington, VA: Rare. Collingridge, D. (2014). Validating a questionnaire. Methodspace. Sage Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.methodspace.com/validating-a-questionnaire/ (accessed April 4, 2017; it was posted three years earlier). Coyle, K. (2010). Training, Educating and Activating U.S. Hunters and Anglers and other Constituencies on Climate Change. National Wildlife Federation. Dannecker, E.A., Hausenblas, H.A., Connaughton, D.P., & Lovins, T. R. (2003). Validation of a stages of exercise change questionnaire. Research Quarterly For Exercise And Sport, 74 (3), 236-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2003.10609088

DJ Case and Associates (2016). American Tree Farm System Case Study: Oregon. Emani, S., Thomas, R., Shah, R., & Mehta, D. S. (2016). Application of Transtheoretical Model to assess the compliance of chronic periodontitis patients to periodontal therapy. Contemporary Clinical Dentistry, 7(2), 176–181. http://doi.org/10.4103/0976-237X.183068 Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4906859/ (accessed March 27, 2017). Kassirer, J. (2017a) Tools of Change. www.toolsofchange.com Kassirer, J. (2017b). Building Motivation and Engagement over Time.

http://webinars.cullbridge.com/enrol/index.php?id=96

Kassirer, J. (2016a). Fostering Forestry Conservation: a ‘best practice’ literature review and synthesis. American Forest Foundation. 10.13140/RG.2.2.25808.10246. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308548422_Fostering_Forest_Conservation_and_Management_among_Woodland_Owners

Kassirer, J. (2016b). Peer Network Interventions for Fostering Forestry Conservation: a ‘best practice’ literature review and synthesis. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30965.58082. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316241588_Peer_Network_Interventions_for_Fostering_Forestry_Conservation_a_%27best_practice %27_literature_review_and_synthesis

Kassirer, J., Korteland, A., & Pedersen, M. (2014). Team Power Smart sparks increase in low-priority, repetitive behaviors. Social Marketing Quarterly, Sept. 2014, 20: 165-185, DOI: 10.1177/ 1524500414541098. http://smq.sagepub.com/content/20/3/165.

Keller, E. & Berry, J. (2003). One in ten Americans tells the other nine how to vote, where to eat and what to buy. The Free Press, New York; as referenced in Coyle, K., (2010). Training, Educating and Activating U.S. Hunters and Anglers.

Kueper, A.M., Sagor, E.S., Blinn, C.R. & Becker, D.R. (2014). Extension Forestry in the United States: Master Volunteer and other peer- learning programs. J. For. 112(1). LaMorte, W. (2016) The Transtheoretical Model (Stages of Change) Boston University School of Public Health. Retrieved from http://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/MPH-Modules/SB/BehavioralChangeTheories/BehavioralChangeTheories6.html (accessed March 27, 2017). Ma, Z., Kittredge, D. and Catanzaro, P. 2011, Challenging the traditional forestry extension model: Insights from the Woods Forum Program in Massachusetts. Small-scale Forestry 11(1):87-100 · March 2011 DOI: 10.1007/s11842-011-9170-2. Maloney, E.K., Knight Lapinski, M., & Witte, K. (2011). Fear Appeals and Persuasion: A Review and Update of the Extended Parallel Process Model. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 5(4):206 - 219 · April 2011. Retrieved on April 30, 2017 from www.researchgate.net/publication/229955782_Fear_Appeals_and_Persuasion_A_Review_and_Update_of_the_Extended_Parallel_Process_Model

Martin, I.M., Bender, H. and C. Raish (2007). What motivates individuals to protect themselves from risks: the case of wildland fires. Risk Analysis, Vol. 27, No.4, August 2007, 887-900. Maruf, F. A., Umunnah, J. O.; Akindele, M.O. (2017). Associations of constructs of Transtheoretical Model with physical activity behavior among individuals with essential hypertension. Cardiopulmonary Physical Therapy Journal: January 2017 - Volume 28 - Issue 1 - p 12–21. doi: 10.1097/CPT.0000000000000045 Meagher, K. (2013). Tupperware parties for solar panels. Blog posted on The Systems of Exchange on February 12, 2013. Retrieved from www.systemsofexchange.org/casestudies/tupperware-party-solar (accessed on November 11, 2016). Muth, A., Subjin, A., Sagor, E., Strong, N., & Walkingstick, T. (2013). Growing Your Peer Learning Network: Tools and tips from the Women Owning Woodlands Network. Oregon State University Extension Service EM 9064, August 2013. Retrieved from https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/em9064) (accessed December, 6, 2016). Noar, S.M., Benac, C.N., and Harris, M.S. (2007) Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychological Bulletin, 4, 673-693. Noar, S.M. (2017) Transtheoretical Model and Stages of Change in health and risk messaging. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. Retrieved from http://communication.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-324 (accessed March 31, 2017) Prochaska, J.O. and DiClemente, C.C. (1983). Stages and processes of self changes in smoking. Towards an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology; 5:390-395. Retrieved from Prochaska. J.O. (2008). Decision Making in the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change. Med Decis Making 2008, 28, 845–849.

Prochaska, J.O., DiClemente, C.C., & Norcross, J.C. (1992). In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors. American Psychologist, Vol 47(9), Sep 1992, 1102-1114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003066X.47.9.1102. Rogers, E. (1995) Diffusion of Innovations (4th Ed.) New York: The Free Press. Shelton, D.P., Wilke, R.A., Franti, T.G., & Josiah, S.J. (2009). “Farmlink” - Promoting Conservation One-ToOne. Retrieved from http://www.cinram.umn.edu/sites/cinram.umn.edu/files/josiah.pdf and http://www.centerforagroforestry.org/academy/2013/Shelton-FarmLink.pdf (accessed December, 6, 2016). Shuz, N., & Wiedemann, A. (2008). Predicting transitions from preintentional, intentional and actional stages of change. Health Education Research, February 2008. DOI: 10.1093/her/cym092. Sustaining Family Forests Initiative. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.engaginglandowners.org/about and www.engaginglandowners.org/case-studies (accessed November 15, 2016). Tang, T., Nwankwo, R., Whiten, Y. & Oney, C. (2012). Church-based peer led diabetes prevention program. Diabetes Educ. 2012 Jul-Aug; 38(4):519-25. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0145721712447982. Epub 2012 May 18. Tang, T., Nwankwo, R., Whiten, Y. & Oney, C. (2014). Outcomes of a church-based diabetes prevention program delivered by peers: a feasibility study. The Diabetes Educator March 1, 2014 40: 223-230. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0145721713520569 Tannenbaum, M.B., Hepler, J., Zimmerman, R.S., Saul., L., Jacobs, S., Wilson, K., and Albarracin, D. (2015). Appealing to fear: a meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness and theories. Psychological Bulletin Vol. 141, No. 6, 1178-1204. Velicer, W. F, Prochaska, J. O., Fava, J. L., Norman, G. J., & Redding, C. A. (1998). Smoking cessation and stress management: Applications of the Transtheoretical Model of behavior change. Homeostasis, 38, 216-233. Weiber, F. & Gollwitzer, M. (2017). Chapter 10 in: P. Meusburger et al. (eds.), Knowledge and Action, Knowledge and Space 9, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-44588-5_10. Retrieved from http://www.psych.nyu.edu/gollwitzer/Wieber%20&%20Gollwitzer%20Planning%20and%20the%20Control%20of%20Action%202017.pdf on March 27, 2017. Weiber, F., Thurmer, J.L & Gollwitzer, P. (2015). Promoting the translation of intentions into action by implementation intentions: behavioral effects and physiological correlates. Frontiers in Human Neroscience July 2015 (9): 395 doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00395. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4500900/ on April 4, 2017. Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communication Monographs, 59, 329 – 349. http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a911 941875. Wood, A. Holland, S., Mozer, M., Tagney, C., & Rasmusssen, H. (2016) Development and Psychometric Testing of a Questionnaire to Assess Knowledge of and Stages of Change Related to a Low-Sodium Diet in Heart Failure Patient. The FASEB Journal vol. 30 no. 1 Supplement lb334.

Accelerating Movement Through the Stages of ...

Accelerating Movement Through the Stages of ...

Suggest Documents

Accelerating Movement Through the Stages of ...

Accelerating Digital Forensics through Parallel

Accelerating Achievement Through Summer Learning

Accelerating Translational Research through Open Science: The ...

Accelerating Poverty Reduction in Bangladesh Through the ...

The Significance of Expression through Movement ...

MOVEMENT OF FAECAL BACTERIA THROUGH THE ... - CiteSeerX

THE MOVEMENT OF STORM SURGE THROUGH A

awareness through movement

Accelerating the Uptake of Smart City Applications through Cloud ...

The Intersex Movement: Empowering Through New Technologies

Accelerating Public Health Situational Awareness through Health ...

Accelerating Scientific Discovery Through Computation and ...

Accelerating Disease Gene Identification Through Integrated SNP

Accelerating global health through education - Shadow Health

Accelerating Innovation through Energy Technology ... - OECD.org [PDF]

Accelerating Scientific Discovery Through Computation ... - CiteSeerX

Accelerating process development through analysis ... - BioMed Central

Accelerating Imitation Learning through Crowdsourcing - Computer ...

Accelerating Financial Inclusion through Non-cash Assistance ...

Accelerating Full-System Simulation through ... - CiteSeerX

Accelerating Financial Inclusion through Innovative Channels

Grand challenge: accelerating discovery through technology ...

Accelerating Robot Development Through ... - Christoph Bartneck