Lawi S. Njeremani
This is the full interview with the Director of Agronomy, Cabot Cape Breton, from the article Time for a Lobby Group for the Turf Industry in Canada?
Background to the interview
The most visible stakeholders in the Turf industry can be quickly identified as golf courses, golf course Superintendents, Sod producers, Municipal and Professional Sports fields, Consulting & Research institutes, synthetic turf manufacturers, Municipal Parks & Recreation facilities, Landscaping and/or professional lawn care, Sales suppliers and dealers.
Unfortunately, these stakeholders are fragmented along lines of specialization and their respective end products. Even where the stakeholders recognize by mutual consensus that their activities have direct dependence, inter-relation and co-relation this is not reflected at the most crucial level—Policy making.
The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) for example does focus on agriculture, food and rural affairs in its policy structures and strictures. A surface observation disqualifies golf courses in urban areas from the assurance of the Ministry’s services especially when they fall in undefined bounds—which occurs more often as the Turf industry keeps expanding in technology, specialization as well as consumer and stakeholder tastes.
LEE STRUTT: Director of Agronomy
ORGANIZATION: Cabot Cape Breton
L. S. Njeremani: Are there additional Stakeholders you know of that are not covered in the introduction above?
Lee Strutt: No
L. S. Njeremani: Do you agree with the assertion that Turf industry stakeholders are fragmented along lines of specialization and their respective end products?
Lee Strutt: Yes, the use of amenity turf management is fragmented by their own specialism. When policies are made through government bodies, it is normally reliant on a single body or maybe two to lobby policy changes. This is from a United Kingdom point of view
L. S. Njeremani: From your organizational experience, does OMAFRA serve the growing needs of the Turf industry comprehensively or are there gaps of unmet needs?
Lee Strutt: I couldn’t answer this as I have no knowledge.
L. S. Njeremani: As an Industry stakeholder, do you feel there is a need for a Lobby body that brings together all Turf Industry stakeholders and to become the focal point of negotiation and advocacy at Policy making level?
Lee Strutt: Yes, there should, however, getting agreement to cover all the stakeholders to lobby against changes in policy is really difficult, as everyone’s needs are marginally different from one stake holder to another.
L. S. Njeremani: Do you think there is another organization better suited to conduct the lobbying and advocacy? Do they need to update their organizational objectives to include “lobbying and advocacy on behalf of Turf Industry stakeholders” –including but not limited to those listed in the introduction.
Lee Strutt: Sorry I don’t know.
L. S. Njeremani: What would be the obstacles to be surmounted in case there is need for a new Lobby Group?
Lee Strutt: Getting agreement by all stakeholders that they are universally being represented.
L. S. Njeremani: What should the Lobby Group list as its 5 key objectives?
Lee Strutt:
- Support of the stakeholders’ industries
- Communicate the need for individual stakeholders concerns and amalgamate collective concerns
- Showcase best practices already being carried out by stakeholder groups
- Help identify better solution’s that help the environment and society
- Help support a mutual beneficial communication from government organizations to stakeholder industries.
Follow Lee Strutt on twitter
Support our writing: