i) I find your choice of subject interesting and important, but your research question seems a bit too academic and overcomplicated. I had to read it a couple of times to get an idea.
ii) So you will contact ‘environmentally concerned individuals’ online, personally, I’d be more inclined to hear from ‘advocates’ though. ‘equal number of neutral, pro- and anti- grazing responses’ - will you find enough experts on this subject, willing to take part?
iii) Your method of data collection seems reasonable. My question is whether your research country/region specific or global?
iv) The aspects you address I find very relevant - ‘carbon sequestration and biodiversity’.
As for ‘suitable proxies’ - it may not be necessary and you’ll find sufficient information without broadening your scope.
vi) Beside food production it fits the bill regarding ecosystem services as well.
vii) I take it you wish to challenge that pro-gazing ‘vocal group’ by your research.
Comments
Thanks Atilla.
i) I'll look again at the title, but I had to craft it carefully to reflect what I can reasonably deduce from such a study with only 1700 words. Also to avoid preloading with a bias or conclusion.
. But I have also been surprised and had some of my own assumptions challenged in the process. I've found that challenging only gets me banned from fb groups- even if it's just sharing what we've learned with the OU in a neutral way. So, I'm hoping to strike a neutral stance here- there are strong motivations beyond science and survival in the anti-camp as well and wild grazers are a natural part of ecosystems after all. So I'm hoping to try a different approach where the subjective aspects are approached with equal respect for all positions and grey areas in the literature are acknowledged (sounds a bit ambitious I know!).
ii) The idea is that those questioned are not experts- even the professional advocates often have a very shaky hold on scientific practice and detail it seems. I'm interested here to find out what affects the perceptions of ordinary people.
ii) It will be global, since my group is international as is the issue and I may not get enough response if I limit regions. I shall clarify this in light of your question- thanks. The research is mostly from the USA- but there are interesting papers from Mongolia and China- the first a traditional grazing country- the second a key player in a sustainable future.
iv) I am quite familar with the literature in general and lack of papers specifically addressing the characteristics of 'holistic managed grazing' is the get out clause for many believers. There is at least one paper specifically addressing those characteristics but it uses biomass as a proxy- so I wouldn't like to exclude it.
v) It does- something that pleases me!
vi) I have a history of challenging them
Cheers again and good luck.