A forum for discussing stormwater public outreach in NC
How should permittees determine the proper mix of mass media versus face-to-face outreach?
Is it acceptable to use 100% one or the other?
Should permittees coordinate campaign components for specific issues? For example, a pet waste media campaign could be coordinated with increased signage and waste receptacles. Such coordination would leverage both components and would be more likely to bring about behavior change.
It's imperative that we do both. Mass media obviously reaches many more people with a simple message. This ideally results in greater awareness and specific behavior changes across the population. However, face-to-face environmental education is crucial to build an informed citizenry capable of making complex decisions regarding water quality issues. Environmental education is an investment in long-term change.
I think coordinated campaigns are more effective. I like the idea of a general umbrella theme that each individual campaign can be grouped under. That way you are maintaining some sense of continuity and a recognizable tagline, but can focus resources and attention on one issue/behavior at a time.
mwtiger
Member
I think a lot of it depends on the goal of your outreach campaign. In 2000, Chris Swann (http://www.epa.gov/ord/WebPubs/nctuw/Swann.pdf)with the Center for Watershed Protection suggested that mass media campaigns are better at increasing watershed awareness and dissuading negative watershed behaviors. While intensive training, is superior at changing individual practices in the home, lawn and garden.
I agree that coordination is key. The audience will not discern between a regional entity focused on public awarness through mass media and a local government focused on targeted change through workshops.
You must log in to post.
Clean Water Education Partnership
cwep@tjcog.org | Disclaimer | Site Map
