Survey: GBLC Leadership, Community And Partners¶
| Purpose: | Gather structured feedback from GBLC leadership, staff, members, community representatives and partners about the possible relevance of industrial hemp research to Granite Borders Landcare. |
|---|
Privacy: Responses are for research planning. Personal contact details are optional. Do not include confidential commercial information unless explicitly agreed. Raw responses, contact details and commercially sensitive details will not be published.
Respondent Details¶
| Field | Response | Field | Response |
|---|---|---|---|
| Name (optional) | Date | ||
| Organisation / group (optional) | Locality or area (optional) | ||
| Contact for follow-up (optional) | Preferred contact method |
1. Connection To GBLC Or The Region¶
Tick any that apply.
| Option | Tick | Option | Tick | Option | Tick |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GBLC executive or committee | [ ] | GBLC staff | [ ] | Landcare member | [ ] |
| Producer or landholder | [ ] | Community member | [ ] | Government, research, education or industry partner | [ ] |
| Other | [ ] | Prefer not to say | [ ] |
Other / comments:
2. Strategic Fit¶
Does industrial hemp research align with GBLC's objectives?
| Strongly yes | Somewhat yes | Unsure | Somewhat no | Strongly no |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] |
Brief reason:
3. Possible Benefits To GBLC Objectives¶
Tick any objectives that industrial hemp research could support.
| Option | Tick | Option | Tick | Option | Tick |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil health | [ ] | Water and landscape resilience | [ ] | Biodiversity or habitat | [ ] |
| Producer decision support | [ ] | Regional economic development | [ ] | Education and extension | [ ] |
| Partnerships and research | [ ] | None | [ ] | Other | [ ] |
4. Concerns And Risks¶
Tick the most relevant concerns. Use the comment box for detail.
| Concern | Tick | Concern | Tick | Concern | Tick |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reputational risk | [ ] | Risk of appearing promotional | [ ] | Cannabis or medicinal-cannabis confusion | [ ] |
| Member disagreement or community concern | [ ] | Weak commercial evidence | [ ] | Weak environmental evidence | [ ] |
| Too much staff or volunteer time | [ ] | Funding or governance risk | [ ] | Other | [ ] |
| Unsure | [ ] |
Most important concern:
5. Preferred GBLC Role¶
Choose the role that best matches your current view.
| Role option | Tick | Brief reason |
|---|---|---|
| No active role; monitor only | [ ] | |
| Publish neutral decision-support material | [ ] | |
| Partner in a funded research project | [ ] | |
| Convene a regional validation program | [ ] | |
| Lead funded primary research and extension | [ ] | |
| Unsure | [ ] |
6. Conditions For Taking A Role¶
What would make you more or less comfortable with GBLC taking a role?
7. Evidence Priorities¶
Mark each evidence gap as High, Medium or Low priority.
| Evidence gap | High | Medium | Low | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buyer demand, prices and specifications | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | |
| Processor access and capacity | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | |
| Producer gross margins | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | |
| Local agronomic suitability | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | |
| Environmental benefits compared with existing land uses | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | |
| Compliance and regulatory burden | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | |
| Community understanding and stigma | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | |
| GBLC capacity and funding | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] |
8. Final Comments¶
What information would you need before supporting further investigation?
People, organisations or evidence sources GBLC should talk to:
Follow-up Permission¶
| Question | Yes | No | Maybe |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are you comfortable being contacted for follow-up discussion? | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] |
| May your comments be summarised anonymously in future project reporting? | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] |
| Would you like to receive a link to future published updates? | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] |