Cooperative Regional Research Project Statement

April 26, 1999

Project Number:	S-290 (S-103/DC97-01)

Title:	Technical and Economical Efficiencies of Producing, Marketing, and Managing Environmental Plants

Duration:	October 1, 1999 to September 30, 2004

Table of Contents

I. Statement of the Problem	Page 3

II. Justification	Page 3

III. Related Current and Previous Work	Page 6

Previous Research	Page 6

Current Research	Page 8

IV. Objectives	Page 16

V. Procedures	Page 16

Objective 1	Page 16

Objective 2	Page 18

Objective 3	Page 19

Objective 4	Page 21

V. Organization	Page 24

Officers	Page 24

Subcommittees	Page 24

VI. Signatures	Page 25

VII. Attachments	Page 26

COOPERATING AGENCIES AND PRINCIPAL LEADERS	Page 26

RESOURCE COMMITMENTS	Page 27

RESPONSE TO EXTERNAL REVIEWER COMMENTS	Page 28

EXTERNAL REVIEWS	Page 32

CRITICAL REVIEW	Page 40

PRINCIPAL S-103 PUBLICATIONS	Page 50

SRRC REVIEW	Page 62

RESPONSE TO SRRC REVIEW	Page 64

Technical and Economical Efficiencies of Producing,

Marketing, and Managing Environmental Plants

I. Statement of the Problem

Often overlooked in the agricultural sector are agricultural products that enhance the quality of life either through aesthetic properties or environmental enhancing properties. In the last fifteen years in the United States, the production, marketing and maintenance of environmental plants has been a growing part of the agricultural economy. Yet, few resources have been allocated to research associated with the above. In fact, the USDA has one person who is responsible for collecting, analyzing, and disseminating economic information regarding environmental plants. Because of the limited nature of resources devoted to this research arena and the growing economic importance of this sector, it is crucial that research mechanisms be developed to assist producers and marketers of these plants to better ascertain opportunities and threats in the next five years.

II. Justification

The U.S. leads the world in the production and marketing of flowers, cut foliage, potted plants, bedding plants, turfgrass, and other nursery crops. These combined products have grown to be known as the "green" industry. The U.S. Green Industry continues to experience strong growth during the 1990's. According to USDA, grower cash receipts are projected to gain about $400 million annually, or about 5 percent, through to the year 2000. This would result in receipts of $12.8 billion in 2000 and $15 billion in 2005. This is an increase from $10.04 billion in 1994. This growth follows a decade of 10 percent growth in the 1980's. (Johnson, 1995)

Furthermore, the U.S. green industry is the second most important sector in U.S. agriculture in terms of economic output, according to a University of Georgia study that took into account the value of inputs purchased and from product handling, marketing, and distribution. It also revealed that, among the various agricultural sectors, the green sector is a major employer. Only the combined crop sector including vegetables, fruits, tree nuts, and hay and pasture employed more person-years in 1990 (Johnson, 1995).

The green industry is usually divided into the floriculture sector (which includes cut flowers, cut cultivated greens, potted flowering plants, potted foliage plants, and bedding and garden plants) and the environmental horticulture sector (which includes crops usually grown outdoors and used primarily for landscaping purposes). These plants include trees, shrubs, ground covers, turfgrass or sod, bulbs, and planting stock (Johnson, 1997).

In 1997, U.S. consumers spent $16 billion on floriculture ($59 per capita), which was the 12th highest in the world in terms of per capita expenditures on indoor flowers/plants. The leading countries with respect to per capita consumption of floriculture products are Japan, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland (Johnson, 1997). Americans, on the other hand, are by far the leading consumers of outdoor landscaping plants. In 1997, U.S. consumers will spend $37 billion on environmental horticultural products, or $138 per capita. A robust economy usually generates increases in housing and other construction. This eventually leads to increased sales of environmental horticultural products, although there is usually a lag between sales of landscape plants and new construction. This lag can be anywhere from 6 months (Johnson,1997) to 2 years (Gineo and Omano).

Landscape plant production has become a major sector within U.S. agriculture and is of major importance to farmers, rural communities, and consumers. In fact, greenhouse and nursery product producers generate the second highest (after vegetables) net value added per dollar of gross income among all agricultural commodities. Net value added provides a measure of agriculture's contribution to the general economy by emphasizing the income generated for all the people who contribute to agriculture production (Jinkins and Ahearn).

While better nursery data and data gathering procedures are needed by researchers and the industry, existing data sources indicate continuing industry growth, not only in the South, but nationwide (Johnson, 1990). Household expenditures on nursery products over the last 25 years appear to have been influenced by household income, the number of single family home construction starts, education levels attained, and age composition of the population (Gineo and Omano).

Many problems in the nursery industry relate to economic and environmental constraints. Environmental constraints revolve around water and soil quality, weather related stresses, and aesthetic and biological requirements. Economic constraints include changing resources, costs (such as land, labor and chemicals), and demand for landscape plants. Another important problem to be considered is the comparative advantages of producers in some regions of the United States. Aggregate data suggests that although the leading ten states' percentage of total grower cash receipts for greenhouse and nursery crops has remained stable (at between 65 and 70 percent) over the last 30 years, the composition of these ten states has changed (Johnson,1990).

The regional/national approach available to this committee will continue to provide a connecting mechanism to permit the collection of primary data to conduct analyses on horticultural and economic problems facing the nursery/greenhouse industry. The collaborative approach is critical to the continuation of multi-state participation in the analysis and development of cost-of-production data for use in interregional competitive position analysis. Cost-of-production data must be generated in a consistent manner in each climatic zone of the United States for the interregional work to be valid. Likewise, the complexity and time required for the construction of production budgets for use in marketing analysis problems is such that a collaborative effort is essential. Unlike traditional agricultural crops, the landscape plant industry produces and markets thousands of different plants. Great care must be taken to select key plants that can suitably represent the cost of producing a group of plants with similar growth characteristics and requirements. Both a horticultural and economic perspective is needed.

While the previous S-103 regional committee (which was national in membership) provided the seminal cost-of-production work, the collection of primary data for marketing purposes is just as vital. Problems with the availability and quality of production and sales data exist to various degrees for all agricultural products, but the problem is most severe for landscape plant products. Data appropriate for use in market analysis studies must be collected by the researchers in a collaborative manner. Otherwise, there is no mechanism to organize, fund, and conduct surveys to collect information useful for interregional analysis.

With limited secondary data, a continuing and difficult question concerns judgements on regional growth prospects in the South as well as in other areas of the nation. The apparent regional advantages due to population shifts, climatic differences, lower resource prices, containerization, etc., are very important. The obvious implication is the prospect for continued growth within the entire nation. With increased growth projections, production and marketing of landscape crops provides an alternative for some farmers that have produced traditional agricultural crops, e.g., corn, cotton, soybeans, tobacco, and vegetables. The evaluation of this potential in terms of individual firm adjustments, structure of the industry, and future technological possibilities should benefit not only nurserymen and consumers, but also the entire southern economy as well as other areas of the nation involved in trade interrelationships. Insight regarding potential growth in demand and adjustments in sources of supply will permit the more efficient allocation of resources over time, which is a critical component of a market-oriented, competitive industry.

Research is needed to ascertain the potential of the landscape industry to provide jobs and business opportunities to agriculturists displaced by the shrinking number of farms in traditional agriculture. Extensive expansion without regard to regional and national supply and demand for landscape plants could result in instability in the landscape industry and the misallocation of resources. Also, the benefits to consumers and the overall environment should be positively impacted by the expansion and further development of society's aggregate demand for landscape plants. Continued nationwide growth and expansion of this industry should benefit society in general because of the improvement in the environment from an aesthetic perspective as well as from the perspective of adding living plant material to our cities and communities where various forms of pollution are apparent.

Collaborative research on the production, marketing, and managing of landscape plants should provide insight regarding the relocation of production of certain species as competitive advantages in the production and/or marketing of these plants are identified. Insight regarding these long-run economic forces would permit researchers, extension workers, and other individuals working with the industry to more efficiently plan the reallocation of these resources than if these long-run economic forces are not identified in advance. In other words, the research may provide insight regarding these adjustments so that in some cases nurseries may be forewarned about the risk of investing for future expansion that may really be destined to relocate to another production area. The possibility of this insight exists with all economic analysis regarding sources of supplies of products.

The research proposed in this project statement coincides with the mission of the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES). This mission is "to achieve significant and equitable improvements in domestic and global economic, environmental, and social conditions by advancing creative and integrated research, education, and extension programs in food, agricultural, and related sciences in partnership with both public and private sectors." Furthermore, the proposed research in this project statement supports goals 1, 4, and 5 of the Strategic Plan developed by the CSREES (Goal 1 - an agricultural production system that is highly competitive in the global economy, Goal 4 - greater harmony between agriculture and the environment, and Goal 5 - enhanced economic opportunity and quality of life for Americans). The cooperation of horticulturists and agricultural economists from around the United States that comprise the S-103 committee offer a unique resource to examine economic and environmental issues.

While the research work that focuses on the production-marketing system will contribute to the overall efficiency of the industry, much of the research will contribute to the applied sciences. Research dealing with new technology and the application of these technologies contribute to the base of scientific knowledge that may lead to application in other horticultural areas, such as vegetable production. The work planned on biological control of insects, water-efficient pelletized container production systems, water holding capacity of various potting media, and alternative irrigation systems will contribute to the advancement of science. This water-related research will also contribute to the number one research area identified for the Southern Region by the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors in the August, 1992, report entitled Southern Strategic Research Plan.

III. Related Current and Previous Work

Previous Research

The initial S-103 regional technical research committee (1976-1982) entitled "Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Ornamentals in the South" was concerned with input-output relationships and costs of producing specific plant species including Kurume azaleas, crape myrtles, dogwood, forsythia, Buford holly, Pfitzer juniper, and pin oaks(Badenhop, et al., 1979; Badenhop and Wright, 1980; Badenhop and Einert, 1980; Smith, 1980; Smith and McConnell, 1981; S-103 Committee, 1979). A series of regional publications, a proceedings of a symposium sponsored by the Tennessee Valley Authority for the American Association of Nurserymen, and other publications have reported results of this research. In these documents, the advantages of various production regions in competing for markets were delineated. Data relating to prices, product mix, distribution patterns, and other characteristics of marketing were analyzed, along with sales invoices from representative samples of nurserymen (Free and Vitelli, 1979; Gamble, 1979; Massey, 1979; Phillips, 1979; Einert, 1979; Badenhop, 1979; Smith and McConnell, 1979; Smith, 1979; McNiel, 1979; Wright, 1979; Crafton, et al., 1982).

The second authorized S-103 project (1982-1987), "Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Ornamentals" focused on physical and economic modeling of both container and field nurseries in USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5 and 6 (Northern States) and in USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 7 and 8 (Southern and Southeastern States) using economic-engineering techniques (Badenhop and Phillips, 1983; Taylor, et al., 1983; Dickerson, et al., 1983; Badenhop, et al., 1985; Badenhop and Glasgow, 1985; Crafton and Phillips, 1984; Phillips, 1984; Crafton, et al., 1982; Perry, et al., 1987). Production depicted by these model nurseries represented the vast majority of the dollar volume of nursery sales from these production regions. Cost differences among species were determined to be caused primarily by differing space requirements, length of production cycles, cost of liners, and over-wintering needs. While the previous studies were not completely comparable because of differences in species studied, year of study, size of plants and assumptions, basic analysis of the data clearly showed cost-of-production advantages for the South.

Profitability of firms in the landscape nursery industry (growers, wholesalers, retailers, repackers and rewholesalers, contractors, etc.) is directly associated with competitiveness in production and in the marketplace. Hence, competitiveness can be measured at the regional level as well as among individual firms. Cost leadership is but one factor influencing the competitive advantage of a production region and/or firm (Coutu and Vitelli, 1979; Phillips, 1979; Free and Vitelli, 1980; Vitelli and Free, 1980; Hinson, 1983; Phillips and Badenhop, 1983; Phillips, 1984), although previous research efforts concentrated on developing baseline cost-of-production data.

Marketing research focused primarily on transportation and distribution of plant material from state to state or region to region (Badenhop, 1981; Doerer, et al., 1982; Williams and Musillo, 1984). Economic analyses and studies of marketing strategies used by industry firms were also conducted (Smith and McConnell, 1979; Phillips, 1984). Although comparative advantage evaluations were conducted between production regions and representative states producing landscape plants, ultimate success by any particular business still hinged on the micro-economic environment within that firm (Gunter, 1979; Hymum and Phillips, 1979; Trieb, 1979; Phillips and Ward, 1980; Smith and McConnell, 1981; Perry and Badenhop, 1982; Crafton and Phillips, 1984).

The third research effort (1987-1993) conducted by the S-103 technical research committee entitled "Technical and Economical Efficiencies of Producing and Marketing Landscape Plants" focused on five interrelated issues. These topics included: (a) budgeting and economics, (b) technical production aspects, (c) firm management, (d) marketing, and (e) interregional competition. Each topic will be discussed separately.

Previous budgeting and economics work by the S-103 committee (1976-1982 and 1982-1987) concentrated on the development of enterprise budgets estimating the cost of producing specific landscape plant species. This approach was expanded and modified into whole-firm modeling utilizing economic-engineering and operations research procedures. The 1987-1993 research effort expanded the scope of analyses in three ways. First, budgets were developed and costs estimated for representative container and field nursery production firms in selected USDA Plant Hardiness Zones, a stratification previously not studied nor reported. Examples of the economic results (Hall, et al., 1987; Phillips, 1989; Perry, et al., 1990; and Foshee, et al., 1990) provided a baseline of economic data observations (capital costs, labor and equipment requirements, operating expenditures, and firm and species profitability) differentiated by size of firm and species of plants stratified by latitudinal plant hardiness zones, which eliminated duplication that would result from a state-by-state approach.

Second, the types of landscape plant products studied were expanded to include diverse production systems, such as turfgrass, perennials, and tissue culture, as well as container-grown, field-grown, and greenhouse-grown landscaping plants (Kizer, et al, 1987; Hall, et al., 1987; Taylor, et al., 1990; and Stegelin and Powell, 1991). Third, the industry sectors analyzed from a budgeting perspective were expanded beyond wholesale growers to include landscape contractors, landscape maintenance firms, and retail garden centers (Barton, et al., 1992). The procedure used for this work was to analyze existing firms recognized as leaders in their respective sectors in order to construct hypothetical firms with representative costs to permit economic comparisons and development of economic guidelines. While considerable progress was made, additional costs and returns studies are needed because of the diverse nature of the greenhouse/nursery industry.

Technological advances in the landscape plant industry have impacted production practices of nurserymen economically and procedurally. With the development of new technology resulting from either scientific advances, legislative edict, changes in consumer and marketing demand, or environmental policy concerns, horticulturalists and agricultural economists participating in S-103 cooperatively conducted several analyses of the applications and economic worthiness of these technologies in the landscape plant industry. Specific studies analyzed biological control of insects, water-efficient pelletized container production systems, water holding capacity of various potting media, pelletized tree production, grow-bag in-ground plant production, alternative irrigation methods, and alternative weed control strategies (Hood, et al., 1987; Taylor, et al., 1989; Tinga, 1988; Aitken, et al., 1990; Alverson, et al., 1990; Eakes, et al., 1990; Gilliam, et al., 1990; Eakes, et al., 1991a; Eakes,et al., 1991b; Briggs and Green, 1991; Robbins, et al., 1991; and Roberts, 1991). While considerable progress was made, continuing pressure for environmental consciousness and for firms to remain financially competitive necessitated the need to continue the study of alternative plant production and maintenance systems.

The predominance of decision-maker, problem-solver, management-oriented research conducted and published during the tenure of S-103 has had firm-level emphasis affecting the economic "bottom line" of producers and marketers of landscape plants. Issues addressed by the technical research committee include optimal product mix, cash flows, pricing strategies, and computer applications (Kizer, et al., 1987; Phillips, 1988; Hall and Phillips, 1989; Phillips and Hall, 1990; Rhodus and Taylor, 1990; Hall and Phillips, 1990;Turner, 1990; Phillips, 1991; Hall and Phillips., 1991; and Barton, et al., 1994). Additional research was needed to extend the information available to industry participants regarding management of biological systems, production technologies, and resource protection and management.

Published marketing research by S-103 committee members has also had a predominant emphasis on the competitive nature of the marketplace and firm management and marketing strategies that take advantage of opportunities available to the firm or region. In part, the status of the general economy influenced this shift in research agenda. As such, the structure, conduct and performance (industrial organization) of the industry were the attention of studies of the competitive market situation and environment (Taylor, et al., 1989; Turner and Stegelin, 1989; Ames, 1990; Behe, et al., 1990; Hodges and Haydu, 1990; Phillips, et al., 1990; Bauer and Brooker, 1991; Brooker, 1991). Several states either completed studies to estimate the aggregate economic impact of the turfgrass industry or to examine the marketing practices of turf producers (Adrian, et al., 1985 and 1986; Stegelin and Powell, 1991; and Adrian, et al., 1992). Continuation of this work is critical to the development of benchmark data for use in analyses of adjustments in the industrial organization of the nursery industry and to perform cross-sectional marketing analyses.

Additional marketing research focused on the consumer, including purchase expenditures, buying patterns, product selection and other purchasing behavior (Ames and Einert, 1987; Gineo and Omamo, 1990; Turner, 1989; Gineo, 1989; Turner and Fletcher, 1989; Turner, et al., 1990; Turner and Dorfman, 1990; Hall, 1991; Johnson, et al., 1991; Stegelin, 1991; Turner, 1991; and Turner and Dorfman, 1991).

Analyzing interregional the trade flows and marketing practices of landscape plant producers throughout the United States was a primary objective of the 1987-1993 S-103 project. All states with technical committee representation participated, along with solicited assistance and participation in many other states. The primary summation report was published as a Southern Cooperative Series Bulletin (Brooker and Turner, 1990). Several cooperating states published individual reports (Brooker, 1989; Brooker and Bryan, 1989; Bryan and Brooker, 1989; Adrian, et al., 1990; and Stegelin and McNiel, 1990), including some publications cited in the earlier marketing section. The competitive relationships among states and regions continues to be a major issue as business managers make financial and marketing decisions regarding future investments and economic strategies.

Current Research

The fourth research effort (1993-1998) conducted by the S-103 technical research committee ("Technical and Economical Efficiencies of Producing, Marketing, and Managing Environmental Plants") had three stated objectives: (1) evaluate alternative landscape (environmental) plant production, establishment, and maintenance systems, (2) evaluate the regional competitiveness within the landscape (environmental plant) industry, and (3) evaluate the demand for landscape (environmental) plants, materials, and services. Research pertaining to each of these objectives is discussed separately.

Objective 1: Evaluate alternative landscape (environmental) plant production, establishment and maintenance systems.

Plant production research included the evaluation of the economic feasibility of growing selected tree species to larger sizes (Tilt, et al., 1994a). The closed, insulated pallet system (CIPS) is an innovative plant production system designed to reduce nursery industry problems with water runoff (Briggs and green, 19940. Research with CIPS has indicated that Phytophthora cinnamomi does not spread from inoculated to noninoculated root pouches. Over 40 genera of plants have grown equally well or better in CIPS compared with open container systems (OCS). Container nursery production is more profitable in CIPS than in OCS. Establishment and maintenance of beneficial microorganisms, such as Trichoderma harzianum is enhanced in CIPS. Water and fertilizer use in CIPS is approximately 90% less than that applied in the overhead irrigated open container systems. There is no fertilizer or irrigation water effluent from CIPS. Plants are more tolerant of saline irrigation water in CIPS (Green, et al., 1993).

Relative costs and returns for selected plants grown using infield, above-ground container and pot-in-pot production methods were evaluated for a 10-acre nursery with a five acre production area and a three year growing cycle. Pot-in-pot systems had high initial capital outlay which resulted in higher fixed cost per plant. However, less intensive cultural practices and increased plant numbers resulted in the lowest per plant cost for the alternative system (Tilt, et al, 1994).

In an analysis of the competitive relationship of three warm-season turfgrass species, variation in the prices of the different grasses had little impact on the profit maximizing combination of grasses within current observable price ranges. Bermudagrass, with its shorter production cycle and positive influence on cash flow, dominates the higher-valued, longer production-cycle grasses (Adrian, et al.,1994)

Several projects were completed that evaluated alternative plant production regimes. These included an economic analysis of Arizona Ash sequentially produced in copper-treated and non-treated containers (Obst, et al.,1996), a determination of optimal marketing strategies for container-based production systems (Stokes, et al., 1996), an evaluation of the production of turfgrass-sod as an alternative farm enterprise (Adrian, et al., 1996), an evaluation of stock plant etiolation and shoot age effects of histology and adventitious root formation in stem cuttings of Carpinus betulus L. 'fastigiata' (Maynard and Bassuk, 1996), an evaluation of the economic feasibility of micro irrigating container grown plants (Haydu and Beeson, 1997), an analysis of the growth and development of euphorbia pulcherrima and pelargonium x hortorum in shredded rubber-containing substrates (Baquir and Harkness, 1997), and estimating the cost of producing container-grown landscape plants with the assistance of computer accounting software (Foshee, et al., 1997).

In addition, studies are nearing completion on turf response to an N release from new coated urea fertilizers (Williams, et al., 1997), greenhouse production and landscape responses of petunia and pansy to copper coated containers, cell size, and extended production schedules (Arnold and Lang, 1997), the impacts of copper leaching from Cu (OH)2-treated containers on water recycling, nursery run-off, and growth of bald cypress and corn (Arnold, et al., 1997). Furthermore, the effect of low water quality and quantity on container plant production was evaluated (Green, 1996), as was the efficacy of using Ethephon during New Guinea impatiens production to delay flowering (Burney and Harkness, 1997). Another recycling study evaluated using calcium carbonate to reduce zinc toxicity in media containing shredded tires, while container production of small trees under kenaf and coconut coir pith was analyzed (Goyne and Arnold, 1996). Finally, an evaluation of rooting rhodendendron without mist was completed (Holt, et al., 1996) and using stock plant shading to increase rooting of paperbark maple cuttings was investigated (Maynard, et al., 1996).

Several projects were completed that evaluated alternative production systems. Chrysanthemum cultivars were shown to respond negatively to shredded tire rubber in the growing medium (Britt and Harkness, 1997). Cultivars bred for greenhouse pot plant culture had leaf tip burn after 5 days in the media and were dead within two weeks. Cultivars bred for use as fall garden mums tolerated the rubber at 10% application levels but never grew as large as the controls. Geraniums were also grown in the shredded rubber media under drip, hand, or ebb and flood irrigation. Leachate samples were collected bi-weekly and were analyzed for pH, soluble salts, and zinc content. At the end of the experiments, foliage samples were also collected and analyzed for mineral content.

Another project examined the economics of pulsed cyclic micro-irrigation in container production (Haydu and Beeson, 1997). With water issues rising to increased prominence in Florida, examining the efficacy of alternative technologies provides useful information for nursery growers, the industry and policy makers.

Background reports for bedding plants, cut flowers and cut greens, and potted flowering and foliage plants are being prepared for the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. These reports will discuss Federal Crop Insurance Corporation industry structure, grower characteristics, marketing, cultivation, harvesting, and management practices, natural perils and prevention methods, disaster assistance payments, scientific name index of crops grown and related information, costs and returns and related supply, demand, price data, and insurance issues (Johnson, 1997).

A survey of greenhouse managers has been conducted to determine products produced and the use of various production technologies. These variables might be associated with firm size (TN). The data assembly was begun to update research on costs of producing selected floricultural crops in Climatic Zones 7 and 8. The previous research is 15 years old and needed to be revised as to crops and greenhouse and plant production technology (Brooker, et al., 1996).

An evaluation of post-transplant root regeneration and field establishment of container-grown Shumard Oak through mechanical correction and chemical avoidance of circling roots (Arnold, 1996) was completed. A comparison of seed rate, spacing and weed control methods in a Virginia meadow (Harkness and Lyons, 1997) was also completed.

Research in the adaptability of native grasses for southeastern humid conditions has resulted in the evaluation of Buffalograss (Buchloe dactyloides) cultivars Texoka and Topgun at 23 cm spacing and 23 and 30 cm spacing, respectively. Seedling little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) at 11.2, 27.4 and 48.8 kg plants/ha provided an acceptable stand when measured visually at any of the rates.

Four cultivars of little bluestem (SCS#9029926, Pastura, Aldous and Cimmeron), 'Alamo' switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) and 'Haskell' sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula) were studied (Aiken, 1995). SCS# and 'Aldous' little bluestem cultivars were superior to the other little bluestem cultivars in plant height and coverage. 'Alamo' switchgrass was much taller and thicker than all the other grass cultivars. The sideoats grama was the shortest of the species.

The comparison study of little bluestem cultivars and 'Alamo' switchgrass completed the second year in the field. 'Alamo' switchgrass is the dominant grass in this study with the seeded plots significantly taller than the transplanted plots and all of the little bluestem cultivar plants both seeded and transplanted. Percent plant coverage was not significantly different between switchgrass and little bluestem cultivars SCS 9029926 and 'Aldous' but was different from little bluestem cultivars 'Pastura' and 'Cimmeron.' Biomass data shows the switchgrass significantly greater than the other species. SCS 9029926 little bluestem cultivar seeded and transplanted was the best of the bluestem cultivars in each of the growth indices. Seeding the species tended to produce a better stand and growth than transplanting in each of the cultivars. Application of Plateau and Roundup herbicide significantly reduced growth of bahiagrass and suppressed seedhead development and suppressed seedhead development for 8 weeks after application (Aiken, 1995).

A host of articles were published concerning pest management in the greenhouse and nursery industry and for landscape maintenance firms (Garber, et al., 1996a; Garber and Hudson, 1996;Hudson, et al., 1996; Garber and Bondari, 1996;Garber, et al.,1996b) ) (GA). Auxiliary articles were published on chemical (Garber, et al., 1996c), disease (Garber, et al., 1996d), insect (Norcini et al., 1996), and weed control (Gilliam, et al., 1990).

Another project has evaluated the use of copper paints and copper-treated burlap for the control of rooting out in B&B nursery stock during holding in wholesale and retail yards (Maynard, 1997). In addition, copper polymers are being evaluated for use in controlling circling of plant roots within containers(Maynard, 1997).

Objective 2: Evaluate the regional competitiveness within the landscape (environmental) plant industry.

Nineteen states from within the project and 5 additional states cooperated to conduct an ornamental plants trade flow survey designed as a follow-up to the 1989 survey. After input from committee members to improve the survey instrument the survey was mailed to certified nurseries in 24 states. Using the Dillman approach (which consists of mail out, follow-up postcard, and remailing the entire package to those who have not responded, within a specified time frame), a response of about 1,350 usable questionnaires was achieved. "Trade Flows and Marketing Practices within the United States Nursery Industry", was published in hard copy and on the World Wide Web (Brooker, 1995)

Using a landscape/retail nursery firm case as an example, the use of employee empowerment to increase productivity and to assist in managerial control was studied. The firm's objective was to release owner time for design and sales activities, while using empowerment of hired managers to maintain profitability and the firm's image as a high quality supplier of services and plants. In the first year, communication to managers and other employees about empowerment and its responsibilities, combined with insufficient control and a declining economy led to a deteriorating financial condition for the firm. Subsequently, communications and personnel turnover, combined with budgeting for control, restored profitability. The case illustrated that a management information system must be available as feedback. Then the empowerment concept can allow decision-making to flow toward the point where work takes place (Hinson and Ackroyd, 1994).

Change of product ownership in competitive agricultural industries is a critical event, yet little research has examined the transaction methods used by firms and the corresponding factors that influence the choice of transaction method. A sample of landscape plant nurseries across the U.S. provided data to model this decision. Transaction methods included sales by telephone, personal visits, mail order, and at trade shows. In addition, factors that influenced negotiated sales were investigated. Influential factors included age of the business, size (as measured by gross sales), location, market channel use, ownership structure, and perspective on competitive situation. Using a tobit estimation procedure, profiles of nursery firms more likely to use a particular transaction method were developed (Hinson, et al., 1995).

Two surveys of the Tennessee nursery industry completed in 1989 and 1994 focused on plant sales to three types of market outlets and the destination of these shipments by state (Brooker, 1996). Wholesale sales accounted for 89% and 93% of annual sales in 1988 and 1993, respectively. With respect to re-wholesalers, the percentage of annual sales to states in the southeast and northeastern regions declined, but sales to re-wholesalers in the north central states and the south central states increased dramatically. The distribution of annual shipments to landscapers decreased in the northeastern region and increased in the north central region. The share of wholesale sales to Tennessee landscapers remained about the same. The major north central states are Kentucky and Ohio. The larger volume states in the northeastern region are Maryland and Virginia. Shipments to out-of-state retailers increased to other southeastern and north central states, but declined to states in the northeast region. In contrast to wholesale sales to landscapers and re-wholesalers, the percentage share of shipments to outlets in Tennessee decreased from 15 to 4 percent.

A study was completed which investigated the tax implications resulting from various nursery organizational structures and product mix scenarios. The impact of "holding over" containerized nursery stock for future sale as larger sized plant materials was assessed. (Stokes, et al., 1996).

An evaluation has been conducted of the feasibility (competitive position) of alternative warm season turfgrass-sod species: bermudagrass, centipedegrass, and zoysiagrass. Analysis are based on budgets developed for south Alabama which would be representative of USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 8. These data were entered into a multiperiod linear programming model to evaluate optimal combinations of grasses to maximize net return over a seven-year planning period. These data were also used to evaluate the feasibility of turfgrass-sod production on an on-going farm operation in this region (Adrian, et al., 1995).

Louisiana trade flows of woody ornamental plants was compared between 1988 and 1993. By kind, the customer base diversified (smaller proportion of sales to each kind of customer) for retailers and rewholesalers, while the portion of sales to landscapers increased. By destination, nurseries with in- state share of sales between 25% and 75% increased from 47% to 93% while in-state sales greater than 75% declined. The west south central region (including Texas) became more important. These changes reflect that in 1988, a national economic slowdown was occurring which worsened a concurrent decline in crude oil prices, and industry wide expansion of production was marketed during the slowdown, intensifying competition (Hinson, 1996).

A study was also completed on out-of-state sales by U.S. landscape plant producers to investigate influential factors (Turner, et al., 1996). The impact of competition and structural change on Florida's ornamental plant nursery and golf course industry was evaluated (Haydu, et al., 1996). In addition, the economic contribution of Florida's and Louisiana's turfgrass industry was evaluated (Haydu, et al., 1996; Hinson and Hughes, 1997). Using data from the 1989 and 1994 S-103 national marketing surveys, the southern states market share was evaluated (Brooker, 1996) as were trade flows between states (Brooker, 1996), nurserymen's marketing practices (Brooker, 1996), and factors perceived to limit growth (Brooker, 1996).

Objective 3: Evaluate the demand for landscape (environmental) plants, materials and service.

The size and impact of the nursery/landscape industry was evaluated with a variety of tactics (NV, GA, NC, TX). A national data base of number of retail garden centers has been used to estimate population thresholds. This project uses count data procedures for estimation of thresholds. This potentially will produce better results than the ordinary least squares procedures. Count data procedures have been extended to incorporate dependency between numbers of garden centers and number of other retail shops. These procedures will incorporate retail shop dependency (Deller and Harris, 1993).

A two-year study was completed that investigated the size and scope of turfgrass-related industries in Texas. This project analyzed the amount of turf and nursery products that are produced in the state, the amounts and value of inputs used in the production/distribution of turfgrass, and the value added to these products as they move through the marketing system. An input-output modeling approach will be used to determine the full economic impact of the turfgrass industry in Texas (Lard and Hall, 1996).

The importance of the green industry in the United States economy is being investigated. The goal of the study is to describe the relative size of this industry in terms of employment, output, and value added. A similar study has been completed for the Georgia economy. Results indicate that within Georgia production agriculture, the green industry ranked second in terms of employment, third in terms of output (annual gross sales), and third in terms of value added (Turner and Kriesel, 1994). Data describing the status and nature of Alabama's ornamental plant industry were also summarized and published (Behe, et al., 1990).

The following two publications have been revised to include current data (DC): Statistical Bulletin 817, Floriculture and Environmental Horticulture Products, a Production and Marketing Statistical Review, 1960-88. Statistical Bulletin 862, Financial Performance of U.S. Floriculture and Environmental Horticulture Farm Businesses, 1987-91 (Johnson, 1990).

Two focus groups (homeowners, landscape professionals) were used to study the acceptance of wildflower sod as a landscape product. The reaction of both groups was positive. Homeowners believed the wildflower sod to be an interesting product for relatively small spaces (Barton, et al., 1996). The own price and income elasticities of the largest selling plants and shrubs are being estimated. Lesser selling plants will be grouped by general categories to estimate their elasticities ((Abdelmagid, et al., 1995).

A survey of the commercial members of the Perennial Plant Association (PPA) indicated that gross sales of perennials by PPA members for 1994 was an estimated $1.38 billion, with 29% of this amount generated from sales of perennial plants. Sales of perennials increased over 1993 levels for 86% of all respondents. The most popular genus sold in the U.S. for 1994 was Hosta, followed by: Hemerocallis, Coreopsis, Chrysanthemum, and Astilbe (Rhodus and Hoskins, 1995).

The relative size of the green industry within the U.S. economy and how it is linked to supporting industries through the volume of transactions and economic impact multipliers was examined. This analysis was based on IMPLAN, an input-output model developed by the U.S. Forest Service. In terms of 1990 employment, the green industry was the second leading employer in U.S. production agriculture. In terms of output, the greenhouse and products sector ranked sixth within production agriculture (Turner and Kriesel, 1995).

Turf acreage and maintenance costs conducted by various states were summarized by the major strata. This data will serve as a basis for estimating the size and relative importance of the US turfgrass industry (Stegelin,and Powell, 1991; White, et al., 1991; Adrian, et al., 1992; Hinson and Hughes, 1996; Haydu, et al., 1996; Lard and Hall, 1996).

A review of the current literature on consumer preferences for plant materials from retail outlets is in progress. Sections will include an introduction with an overview of the economic impact of the green industry, an overview of market research in individual states, general demographic data on garden center consumers, a summary of consumer preference research and an overview of the landscape industry as it relates to preferences of retail consumers (Barton, et al., 1997).

A grant was received from the Bedding Plants Foundation, Inc. to investigate consumers' decision-making process and preferences for geranium by simultaneously defining the importance of and preferences for (1) flower color, (2) leaf variegation, and (3) price (Behe, et al, 1997). Consumer research was conducted in garden centers to investigate preference s for geraniums by asking the flower color, leaf variegation, and price combinations (viewed in photographs on display board) they would or would not purchase. Red and lavender were the preferred colors, while zonal and plain were the most preferred leaf variegation, and low prices were preferred. A simulated blue geranium was not popular as it consistently ranked in the lower third of the preferred combinations. Another product demand that was investigated using focus groups was windflower sod (Barton, et al., 1996). The demand for ornamental products in North Carolina was also investigated (Abdalmagid, et al., 1996).

The demand for labor in Florida's turfgrass industry was evaluated (Cisar and Haydu, 1991). The contribution of the Green industry to the Louisiana economy was determined. A $1 increase in sales by producers resulted in a $1.4291 multiple in economic activity when household spending was excluded, and by $1.9930 when household spending was included. Similar multipliers for landscape/horticultural services were $1.4907 and $2.8920 (Hinson and Hughes, 1997). A study on the impact of population threshold levels on rural nursery retail businesses found that less population was required if other retail firms were present (Shonwiler and Harris, 1996). A North Carolina study explored factors that influence a consumer's selection of a garden center (Safley and Wohlgenant, 1995), while a Georgia study examined customer defections (Stegelin, 1996). Another effective tool to assist retailers of landscape material is image assessment. This was used in Texas to determine image and reputation in a local trade area (Hall, 1996).

New studies that assess the image of competing retail garden centers within local trade areas are underway. The survey instrument used for primary data collection has been refined based on feedback from previous surveys. It is anticipated that a compilation of consumer perceptions may be extrapolated to provide regional trends regarding customer perceptions of retail garden centers (Hall, 1996).

Research revealed that consumers preferred poinsettia cultivars when compared to other colors (Behe, et al., 1997). Consumer preferences for geranium flower color, leaf variegation, and price in five U.S. markets were investigated and again red was the preferred color (Behe, et al., 1997).

Lagerstroemia 'Victor' and 'Zuni' were studied for use as a potted florist crop (Rawson and Harkess, 1997). Experiments were conducted on number and timing of pinching, fertilization rate, and photoperiod response. Pinching and timing of the pinch did not significantly affect the overall size or shape of the plants. Planting 3 liners per 15 cm diameter container provided a larger plant than only 1 liner. The plants are photoperiodic requiring long days for vegetative growth and flowering. Growing the plants under 4 to 8 weeks of short days before moving into long days resulted in the highest quality plants. Applying 200 mg/l N from a 20-10-20 liquid feed once per week or 6 g of 15-11-13 slow release fertilizer resulted in optimum plant growth. Another project is evaluating the growing and marketing requirements of new sustainable plant species for introduction to the nursery industry (Maynard, 1996).

Following up on a study of the demand for labor in Florida's turfgrass industry was an examination of associated labor issues affecting turf-related enterprises (Haydu and Hodges, 1996). A similar project developed a business management oriented teaching case for a small nursery and landscape business (Hinson, et al., 1994). The focus was on an employee empowerment program that moved decision-making closer to the work site. The case used balance sheets and owner description of objectives and implementation to show the firm's changing managerial structure in its attempts to encourage employee initiative and entrepreneurship, thus capturing the potential advantage of a decentralized management style. The case suggests caution since not all managers want to be in an empowered environment, and the learning curve in implementing this system may be a significant factor.

Research was conducted on consumer perceptions and expectations of garden center products service quality (Hudson, et al., 1997). Another project investigated the stability of target markets for landscape plants over a nine year period (Turner, 1997). The different outlets analyzed in this study were large retail stores (Kmart, Walmart, etc.), large lawn and garden centers (Pikes, etc.), and local lawn and garden centers. Economic models were developed to identify factors that would explain the percentage of plants purchased at different outlets. Each equation was estimated using a tobit procedure. The results confirm previous results that different target markets exist for different types of retail outlets for landscape plants. The problem appears to be the lack of stability of the identified target markets. Although some identified factors appear to be significant over a nine year period, most of the identified segmenting variables did not. The results presented here warrant attention because of the instability of the identified target markets.

A World Wide Web site on the Internet was developed during 1995 to disseminate research findings and general program information related to the S-103 Regional Research Committee. Titled, "EnviroPlants Research," this site carries a complete description of the project objectives, project participants, and results of the 1994 survey that documented trade flows and marketing practices within the United States nursery industry for 1993. Additional publications and links to other Internet resources are also available. The URL address for this site is: http://hortwww-2.ag.ohio-state.edu/s103/s103.html.

A CRIS search was initiated at the end of the 1997 fiscal year. Although no other technical research committee or project investigating the production and marketing technologies and economics of landscape horticulture was identified, a Western Regional Coordinating Committee (WRCC) and a Southern Regional Information Exchange Group (SRIEG) were annotated as having interest in landscape plant production (production only). The stated nature of coordinating committees and information exchange groups emphasize communications on what research interests individuals are pursuing, rather than actual collaborative research with stated objectives and organized research committees (e.g., S-103). The participants identified with the WRCC and SRIEG were primarily horticulturists, whereas the make-up of the S-103 technical research committee is currently balanced among horticulturists and agricultural economists, thereby justifying and legitimizing the economic aspects of production technologies, marketing and distribution strategies, and the managerial economics affecting the "bottom line" of producers and marketers of landscape plants.

IV. Objectives

There are four basic objectives for the revised S-103 project research for 1999-2004. These objectives have evolved out of the previous S-103 projects and relate not only to individual producers, retailers, and intermediaries, but also address the increasing maturity of green industry.

Objective 1. Evaluate alternative green industry plant production, establishment, and maintenance systems.

Objective 2. Evaluate the regional competitiveness within the green industry.

Objective 3. Evaluate the demand for green industry plants, materials, and services.

Objective 4. Evaluate the effectiveness of alternative merchandising techniques.

V. Procedures

The procedures for the new project will emphasize the collaborative approach to address researchable problems confronting the rapidly expanding landscape (environmental) plant industry. The nation-wide membership of this research group provides an excellent means for researchers in states with similar production, marketing, or management problems to cooperate as a team. The production budget data, landscape/garden center data, and the sales data generated by the previous S-103 committee provide a base of knowledge that serves as a foundation for further work in these areas.

This committee is unique in its blend of economists and horticulturists, and this mixture of scientists enhances the realization of true interdisciplinary collaboration on research issues. As appropriate, the committee will continue to sponsor and support national and/or international symposia to serve the needs of scientists with an interest in the landscape(environmental) plant industry.

For each major research activity described for each objective, several committee members are identified who will provide leadership for that subcommittee's segment of the overall project. Other interested members of the research committee are encouraged to work with these subcommittee leaders. For instance, many states will participate in the consumer survey, but only a small subset will provide leadership in the questionnaire development and survey coordination. This approach permits the accomplishment of much more research since each committee member will provide leadership in one phase and benefit from others leadership in another phase.

Objective 1. Evaluate alternative green industry plant production, establishment and maintenance systems.

A.	Evaluation of selected horticultural production practices (TX, PA, NJ, AL, GA, SC, MS, LA, RI, KY, NC, IL)

Objective leadership: McNiel. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

Horticulturists and agricultural economists from the states listed above will cooperate to evaluate the application of selected production efficiencies on the propagation, growth, and transplanting of field and container-grown landscape plants. Research will focus on irrigation water use efficiency, fertilizer formulations and uptake, bio-remediation of nursery and greenhouse fertilizer and pesticide effluent, weed control, as well as environmental and chemical methods to improve or modify plant growth. The impact of growing methods on root growth configuration and its effect of transplanting will also be evaluated. It is anticipated that several regional publications will result from these efforts.

B.	Determine economic feasibility of horticultural production systems (PA, TX, LA, KY, OH, FL)

Objective leadership: Hall, Hinson. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

Cost of production (COP) budgets at the grower and retailer level have also been an integral part of past S-103 activities. They provide a baseline for management's evaluation of a particular operation and for outside evaluation of firms by agencies such as lenders. COP budgets have been generated for the relevant plant groups, by plant hardiness zones (5 to 9) that are appropriate to participating states, and by container and field production methods. These are excellent references procedurally, and in terms of the management information they provide. They are, however, aging. The information they contain will be updated. Technologies of production continue to change, and these changes will be reflected as they are adopted by growers. Price relationships between productive inputs change. These budgets will be updated as appropriate.

Information transfer is another area where change has occurred. Most production nurseries have computer hardware. Software programs that are useful in generating COP budgets are easier to use. The internet is readily available in geographic areas of the US where plants are produced. The feasibility of disseminating the results of this research by putting these COP programs "online" in an interactive mode will be investigated as part of this project. It is also anticipated that regional publications (hardcopy and/or electronic versions) will result from these efforts.

C.	Evaluation of selected plant establishment techniques (SC, TX, DE, AL, AR, OR, MS, LA, RI, IL).

Objective leadership: Eakes, Tilt (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

Selected landscape installation techniques will be evaluated based on establishment success and time required. Establishment will be characterized using whole plant growth and physiological parameters. Regional conditions, such as soil type, amendment availability and temperature extremes will be considered. Production practices that affect establishment will be evaluated. Economic inputs required for installation and establishment will be developed. It is anticipated that regional publications (hardcopy and/or electronic versions) will result from these efforts.

D.	Evaluation of landscape maintenance considerations (TX, SC, OR, MS, GA, IL, AL).

Objective leadership: Barton. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

Evaluating plants for highway right-of-ways - Native and naturalized plant material will be evaluated for use in rights-of-ways and roadsides. Evaluation will be based on adaptability, production procedures, establishment techniques, and maintenance requirements. Production and establishment costs will be determined to establish feasibility guidelines. Environmental considerations will be included in all decision-making recommendations.

A roadside vegetation project has been funded by the National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council in Delaware. The project will include four different planting treatments: (1) edit existing vegetation and add desirable native species, (2) cutback treatment with woody plants and herbaceous perennials and grasses in two cutback zones, (3) herbaceous perennials and grasses and (4) annual flowers seeded yearly. Researchers will monitor establishment procedures and costs; maintenance procedures and costs; environmental impacts; and public perception for each treatment. Results will be used to develop recommendations for highway vegetation managers.

Evaluating economic feasibility of plants for sustainability and reduced inputs - The economic impacts of modern agricultural practices in the green industry; the increasing reliance on non- renewable resources and reduced inputs in establishing, producing , and maintaining plant materials; and the effectiveness and efficiencies of sustainable agricultural technologies in evaluating the economic feasibility of alternative plant materials are concerns permeating the green industry. Procedural activities will include (a) the review of current establishment and maintenance recommendations and estimations of costs; (b) the determination of feasibility-risk- profitability trade-offs in using reduced inputs levels in establishment-production-maintenance regimes and economic feasibility analysis; and (c) the application of these models to evaluate plant materials with regard to productive effectiveness and economic efficiency in the landscape.

Objective 2. Evaluate the regional competitiveness within the green industry.

Objective leadership: Brooker. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

Data to support analysis of adjustments in marketing and management practices of wholesale and retail firms will continue to be obtained by mail survey techniques. In 1989 this research committee collected data from 23 states , which accounted for 75% of the U.S. total grower cash receipts. A second data set was obtained in 1994 with 24 participating states, representing 79 percent of the U.S. total. In states without representation on the S-103 committee, other horticulturist or agricultural economists worked with the S-103 committee on these surveys because of their desire to have the information collected. Also, data from a couple of key states were obtained with the help of the state's nursery association. All states with representation on the S-103 committee are anticipated to participate in this third nation-wide survey activity (AL, AR, FL, DE, GA, FL, IL, KY, LA, MI, MS, NC, NJ, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, and TX). It is anticipated that a regional publication similar to the previous two (hardcopy and electronic versions) will result from these efforts.

Participating states will each use a common questionnaire soliciting information regarding management and marketing practices, production information, and detailed sales information regarding interstate movement of the product and the volume of business with various types of buyers. The third nation-wide survey by the S-103 committee will provide an important, unique cross sectional data set that will permit the evaluation of trends and/or structural adjustments occurring within the U.S. green industry. These three data sets will provide input for scientific investigation that is not available from any other source. While the intent will be to conduct the survey in every state, leadership will be provided by Brooker (TN), Hall (TX), Hinson (LA), McNiel (KY), and Turner (GA). Questionnaires will be distributed by a participant in each state, but all questionnaires will be returned to Tennessee for coding and preparation for analysis.

Another area to be examined is the relative size of the green industry within the U.S. economy and how it is linked to supporting industries. The approach taken is to use IMPLAN, an input- output model developed by the U.S. Forest Service. Research of this nature was published in 1995 (Turner and Kriesel) and will be updated during the course of this proposal. It is important that the green industry's contribution to agriculture and the economy be empirically documented.. Since data for this analysis is generated every five years, logic suggests that this research should be updated every five years also (FL, GA, LA, OH, and TN).

Objective 3. Evaluate the demand for green industry plants, materials, and services and how consumers evaluate their quality.

A.	Investigate consumer preferences for plants characteristics and services (GA, DE, MI, IL, OH, AR, NC, KY, SC, TX, LA, TN, AL, FL, MS)

Objective leadership: Behe, Barton. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

The nursery industry is becoming more competitive and consumers are becoming more demanding. However, few studies have been conducted to determine the quality factors customers consider important and how it influences their purchase decisions. Moreover, little research has been conducted to examine the potential differences in assessments of product quality between plant professionals and consumers. The information generated in research studies will assist retail nursery professionals to better meet the needs of their customers.

Researchers plan to (1) ascertain the important quality factors and plant quality characteristics for a variety of woody plants and floriculture products, (2) identify the quality preferences of consumers and professionals, and (3) investigate the relationships between quality attributes and prices paid by customers. Results will assist growers and plant breeders focus on important quality attributes and provide input for development of grades and standards for the retail nursery industry.

Similarly, service quality affects customer satisfaction with the products they purchase and the retail outlets from which products are purchased. Studies will investigate consumer expectations and perceptions of service quality received from diverse retail outlets for horticultural products and services. Information from these studies will assist businesses in quantifying the effectiveness of service programs and in defining a competitive advantage in the marketplace.

HRI provided a $20,000 grant to study the increase in home value from different types of landscaping. A landscape architect prepared 12 landscape designs, representing 12 treatment combinations. Three plant sizes will be used to create 36 possible treatment combinations. Using the Conjoint design, 16 treatment combinations were chosen. Sixteen computer-generated photographs have been created to represent the 16 treatment combinations. A base plan with the house and turf only will be used for comparison. The photographs will be sent to each of eight participating states. Photographs will be mounted on foam core and displayed on easels (4 per easel). A survey instrument will be developed to ask participants what they would pay for each home and landscape combination. Researchers will conduct the survey in their own market at a local home show. The differences between the values for the base plan (home and turf only) and each treatment combination will be analyzed. Conjoint analysis will be used to determine the individual factors that impact consumer's decisions with regard to home values. It is anticipated that several regional publications will result from these efforts.

B.	Analyze the demand for selected species and plant categories (NC, MI, DE, GA, MS)

Objective leadership: Turner, Safley. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

There is a dearth of information on the demand for plant material and nursery products. Given the dramatic growth of the horticulture industry, demand estimates are needed to help nursery professionals segment markets and more effectively target products and services. Most demand studies have provided useful information on the relative importance of various socioeconomic variables such as household income, number of single-family home construction starts, consumer education levels, and age composition of the population. However, few studies have taken into account the influence of prices on demand behavior. Collaborating researchers will conduct surveys at cooperating garden centers during the peak marketing seasons to determine the plant material consumers purchased, the prices they paid for the plants, and the demographic variables needed to estimate demand functions. A modified form of the Almost Ideal Demand Systems (AIDS) can then be used to estimate demand functions and the income and price elasticities for individual plants. These results can help marketers identify and target potential customers. It is anticipated that several regional publications will result from these efforts.

Objective 4. Evaluate the effectiveness of alternative marketing techniques.

A.	Analyze the effectiveness of alternative methods of evaluating new plants, products, and services (MS, TX, AL, NC, DE, LA, FL, MI).

Objective leadership: Knight. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

Previous research conducted in garden centers investigated preferences for geraniums by asking the flower color, leaf variegation, and price combinations (viewed in photographs on display board) they would or would not purchase (NC, GA, AL, TX, DE). Red and lavender were the preferred colors, while zonal and plain were the most preferred leaf variegation, and low prices were preferred. A simulated blue geranium was not popular as it consistently ranked in the lower third of the preferred combinations. Conjoint analysis was used to identify important factors in the purchase decision.

This research framework is applicable to other plants, products, and services. One plan is to investigate the impact of statewide plant identification techniques (such as Georgia's Gold Medallion program) that focus on several plants. In other words, what economic impact does being identified with a particular promotional program have on product sales. It is anticipated that several regional publications (hardcopy and/or electronic versions) will result from these efforts.

B.	Investigate alternative retail-level pricing schemes and displays (NC, DE, TX, GA).

Objective leadership: Safley, Barton. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

Pricing decisions and product displays are critical elements in the success of a business. While there are various strategies and methods managers can follow to set prices and display plants, there is limited research on the effect that varying prices and displays have on total sales. Researchers collaborating on this objective will recruit two to three garden centers in the same city to participate in two controlled in-store marketing tests. In the first test, identical plant displays will be set up and maintained for three to four weeks in the cooperating garden centers. A different price will be charged for the plant at each garden center. Prices will be changed at each store every Monday for the duration of the study. In the second study, the same price will be charged at each garden center, but the plant displays will be changed every week. Researchers will ensure that any advertising for the selected plant is comparable between cooperating garden centers to reduce any external bias.

C.	Investigate the application of electronic marketing technologies (OH, TX, NC, DE, GA, TN, MS, LA, FL).

Objective leadership: Rhodus. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

Recent innovations in information technologies have brought the marketing of plants to the internet. Specific firms are incorporating CD-ROM technology, in conjunction with e-mail, to buyers to further increase the efficiency and convenience of their marketing programs. Research will focus on the adoption rate of this technology and what type of firm that is more likely to use computerized communication as an integral component in their overall marketing strategy. Data will be collected from the third nation-wide survey referred to under Objective 2. Analysis can be accomplished on a state by state basis and summarized at the national level.

D.	Evaluate the effectiveness of retail-level advertising (NC, AR, GA, MS, LA, TX, TN, MI, FL).

Objective leadership: Safley, Haydu. (Objective leaders serve as chair or co-chairs of subcommittees that been developed for the respective objective. They will provide oversight to the subcommittee to ensure regional collaborative efforts, and to coordinate publication efforts)

Advertising is one of the fundamental tools for retail businesses. Its basic premise is straightforward: tell people who you are, where you are, what products and services you offer and why you offer a better value than your competitors. The immediate objective is to sell merchandise by increasing the number of shoppers and influencing them to buy more. The long-term objective is to develop continuity in the business's relationship with regular customers. Ongoing decisions for managers relate to which advertising media to invest in and how much to spend. However, most managers do not evaluate the effectiveness of their advertising and are not sure if their ads are having the desired results. Consequently, they are not able to adjust their ad programs from week to week or between marketing seasons.

Therefore, the overall purpose of this objective is to collect fundamental data about garden center advertising and promotional programs so managers can evaluate and improve their individual ad campaigns. Cooperating garden center managers will be asked to keep copies of their advertisements and commercials during peak marketing periods so researchers can analyze them for content and style. Researchers will survey customers at garden centers to determine if any of these advertisements prompted their visit to the store and the message within the ad that had the most impact on their shopping decision. Customers who were not influenced by an ad will be surveyed to find out if they can recall any of the advertisements promoting the business.

Other garden centers will be recruited to help evaluate the benefit of coupons. Cooperating managers will distribute coupons through their local newspapers, newspaper inserts, direct mail brochures or newsletters. Coupons can be redeemed for any product or for a specific plant. The number of redeemed coupons and the corresponding sales receipts will be recorded. This data will be compared to the sales receipts of those who did not redeem a coupon to help estimate the value of coupons in attracting customers and increasing sales. It is anticipated that regional publications (hardcopy and/or electronic versions) will result from these efforts.

V. Organization

The Technical Committee shall be organized in accordance with the manual for Cooperative Regional Research (USDA/CSREES, Revised January 1986) and shall operate under the regulations specified therein.

Officers

All voting members of the technical committee are eligible for office, regardless of sponsoring agency affiliation. The chair, in consultation with the administrative adviser, notifies the technical committee members of the time and place of meetings, prepares the agenda, presides at meetings of the technical committee and the executive committee. The chair is responsible for preparing or supervising the preparation of the annual report of the regional project. The secretary records the minutes and performs other duties assigned to him/her by the technical committee or the administrative advisor. The secretary shall prepare and email the minutes of any official meeting to committee members within a six-week period.

Subcommittees

An executive committee consisting of the chair and two or more other members of the technical committee may be designated to conduct the business of the committee between meetings and perform other duties as assigned by the technical committee. Subcommittees will be named by the chair as needed for specific assignments. This format may include subcommittees to develop procedures, manuals, and phases of the regional project; to review work assignments; to develop research methods; and to prepare publications.

VI. Signatures

Title:	Technical and Economical Efficiencies of Producing, Marketing, and Managing Landscape Plants.

______________________________________	___________________

Administrative Advisor	Date

______________________________________	___________________

Chair, SRRC	Date

______________________________________	__________________

Chair, SAAESD	Date

______________________________________	__________________

Administrator, CSREES	Date

VII. Attachments

COOPERATING AGENCIES AND PRINCIPAL LEADERS

Agency	*Official Voting Member

Auburn University (Alabama)	John Adrian, Joe Eakes*, and Ken Tilt

University of Arkansas	A.E. Einert*

University of Delaware	Susan Barton*

University of Florida	John Haydu*, Alan Hodges, and PJ van Blokland

University of Georgia	Mel Garber , Forrest Stegelin, and Steven Turner*

University of Illinois	David Williams*

University of Kentucky	Robert McNiel*

Louisiana State University	Jeff Kuehny, Roger Hinson*

University of Maine	Reeser Manley*

Michigan State University	Bridget Behe*

Mississippi State University	Patricia Knight, Richard Harkess *, Ben Posadas

North Carolina State University	Charles Safley*

Rutgers University (New Jersey)	Robin Brumfield*

Ohio State University	Timothy Rhodus*

Oregon State University	Larry Burt*

Pennsylvania State University	Dave Beattie *

Purdue University	Bruno Moser*

University of Rhode Island	Brian Maynard*

Clemson University (S. Carolina)	Tom Fernandez*, Larry Bauer

University of Tennessee	John Brooker*

Texas A & M University	Charles Hall*, Michael Arnold

USDA/CSREES	David Holder

Administrative Advisor	Everett Emino

RESOURCE COMMITMENTS

State	Project Leader(s)	Specialization	Objective(s)	Commitment

SY PY TY
Alabama
John Adrian

Joe Eakes*

Ken Tilt	Agr. Economics

Horticulture

Horticulture	2,3a,4a

1a,1c,1d

1a,1c,1d	.20

.10

.10	-

-

-	-

-

-
Arkansas	A.E. Einert*	Horticulture	1a,2	.10	.20	.20
Delaware	Susan Barton*	Horticulture	1c,2,3a,3b,4a,4b	-	.05	-
Florida	John Haydu*

Alan Hodges

PJ van Blokland	Agr. Economics

Agr. Economics

Agr. Economics	1b,2,3a,4c

1b,2,4a,4d

1b,2	.10

.10

.10	-

-

-	.10

.10

.10
Georgia	Mel Garber

Forrest Stegelin

Steven Turner*	Horticulture

Agr. Economics

Agr. Economics	1a,1d

2

2,3a,3b,4b	.10

.10

.28	-

-

.33	-

-

-
Illinois	David Williams*	Horticulture	1a,1c,1d,2	.20	.50	.20
Kentucky	Robert McNiel	Horticulture	1a,1b,2	.20	-	.20
Louisiana	Jeff Kuehney

Roger Hinson*	Horticulture

Agr. Economics	1a,1c

1b,2,4a,4c,4d	.20

.20	.30

-	-

-
Maine	Reeser Manley	Horticulture	1a,2	.10	-	-
Michigan	Bridget Behe*	Agr. Economics	2,3a,3b,4a,4d	.05	-	-
Mississippi	Patricia Knight

Richard Harkess*

Ben Posadas	Horticulture

Horticulture

Agr. Economics	1a,1c,1d,4a

1a,1c,1d

2,3b,4c	.10

.10

.10	-

-

-	-

-

-
North Carolina	Charles Safley*	Agr. Economics	1a,2,3a,4a,4b,4d	.10	-	-
New Jersey	Robin Brumfield*	Agr. Economics	1a,2	.10	-	-
Ohio	Timothy Rhodus*	Horticulture	1a,1b,2,3a,4c	.05	-	-
Oregon	Larry Burt*	Horticulture	1a,1c,1d,2	.05	-	-
Pennsylvania	Dave Beattie*	Horticulture	1a,1b,2	.15	-	-
Indiana	Bruno Moser*	Horticulture	1a,2	.10	-	-
Rhode Island	Brian Maynard*	Horticulture	1a,1c,2	.10	-	.20
South Carolina	Tom Fernandez*

Larry Bauer	Horticulture

Agr. Economics	1a,1c,1d

1b,2,3a	.20

.20	-	-
Tennessee	John Brooker*	Agr. Economics	2,3a,4c	.22
Texas	Charles Hall*

Michael Arnold	Agr. Economics

Horticulture	1b,2,3a,4a,4c,4d

1a,1c,1d	.10

.10	-

-	-

-
* Official Voting Member

RESPONSE TO EXTERNAL REVIEWER COMMENTS

An overwhelming viewpoint on the part of external reviewers of the S-103 Southern Regional Project was that this research committee has been highly productive historically and that there is every indication that this productivity will continue in the next project period. This is further substantiated by CREES officials referring to the S-103 Regional Project as a "model for regional research efforts". In this critical review, the S-103 proposal writing committee highlights how the major concerns of the external review panel have been addressed either in the proposal itself or by the comments included herein. In the midst of many positive comments made by the external review panel, there were several pertinent issues brought forth by the review panel and each of these issues is addressed separately below.

Issue 1	"...other than Oregon, no western states are included in the project..."

The S-103 committee fully recognizes the importance of western states such as California and their respective importance to the nursery and landscape industry. This fact was even brought up again in the committee's latest working meeting. A subcommittee was developed to investigate potential membership from key western states, as well as replacement representation from key states that have lost membership (i.e. New York) due to committee members moving to other land-grant institutions. As these potential members are identified, an analysis of their current research efforts will be to determine potential synergies that might result from their participation. If such synergies are found to exist, they will be actively solicited for membership on the committee.

Issue 2	"...what is the past, present, and future role of industry in this research project?..."

While not obvious at first, industry has played an important role in the S-103 committee's research efforts. First, they have been instrumental in aiding researchers in identifying "best management practices" for the nursery and landscape sectors. This had been a critical element in conducting cost of production analyses. To collect pertinent data necessary for the economic engineering methodology of determining costs, researchers have utilized the Delphi method of primary data collection, which is inherently impossible without the cooperation of industry representatives.

Another important role which industry has played in S-103 research efforts is their input and guidance regarding research priorities for the nursery and landscape industry. For example, many of the S-103 committee members present (and publish) the results of S-103-related research at the Southern Nurserymen's Association Annual Research Conference. The objective of the conference is to not only allow researchers to present their results to others in academia, but to key nursery industry leaders as well. Much discussion from industry participants revolves around the usefulness of research findings, further research stemming from studies presented, and future areas of research needed by the industry. There is no mistaking the power and influence that these industry leaders have in identifying priority areas of research for the future.

Issue 3	"...Cost of production is important, but only as a tool for policy analysis and testing industrial organization hypothesis..."

While reviewers tended to downplay the importance of cost of production research, industry participants have viewed the budgets as an important planning tool for their respective operations. One indicator of the demand for this type of research is their willingness (eagerness) to participate as Delphi participants. Those who have conducted primary data collection and experienced the difficulties in obtaining reliable data will appreciate the subtleties of that statement.

Another indication of the importance of such studies has been the intense demand for the Southern Cooperative Series publications that have resulted from this research. The data is collected and reported by climatic zones, which makes them applicable across state boundaries. Because of this, growers have even reported using the publications as a guide to growing and costing plants in their own operations (even though readers are cautioned to use the publication as a model for conducting their own analysis). Though humbling, this is a healthy complement to the realism, accuracy, and pragmatic nature of the research efforts.

The committee does recognize however, that information technologies (such as the internet and writeable cd-rom) may expedite the delivery of such cost of production analyses. This capability is currently being explored by a newly established Publication Distribution and Delivery subcommittee.

Issue 4	"...why is it important to document the green industry's contribution to agriculture and the economy..."

In the justification section of the proposal, the importance of the green industry to the agricultural economy is presented. However, it should be noted that the U.S. green industry is the second most important sector in U.S. agriculture in terms of economic output, according to a previous S-103 study that took into account the value of inputs purchased and from product handling, marketing, and distribution. It also revealed that, among the various agricultural sectors, the green sector is a major employer. Only the combined crop sector including vegetables, fruits, tree nuts, and hay and pasture employ more person-years.

Landscape plant production has become a major sector within U.S. agriculture and is of major importance to farmers, rural communities, and consumers. In fact, greenhouse and nursery product producers generate the second highest (after vegetables) net value added per dollar of gross income among all agricultural commodities.

In the last fifteen years in the United States, the production, marketing and maintenance of environmental plants has been a growing part of the agricultural economy. Yet, few resources have been allocated to research associated with the above. In fact, the USDA has one person who is responsible for collecting, analyzing, and disseminating economic information regarding environmental plants. Because of the limited nature of resources devoted to this research arena and the growing economic importance of this sector, it is crucial that research mechanisms be developed to assist producers and marketers of these plants to better ascertain opportunities and threats in the next five years.

Issue 5	"...what is the outreach component of the project?..."

While extension and outreach-related activities are not explicit charges of many of the S-103 committee members (with 100% research appointments), it is well understood among the group that outreach is an important and integral part of committee activities. Because of this emphasis, the committee has been and will continue to be prolific in terms of publication output in response to the demand by industry participants. Another aspect of the committee's outreach efforts is the sponsoring of conferences and symposia. Besides the extensive participation in the Southern Nurseryman's Association Research Conference mentioned earlier, the S-103 committee has sponsored the International Society of Horticultural Sciences (ISHS) Conference in New Jersey and the Horticultural Researchers Symposia in Brussels. This type of informational exchange and outreach will continue to be a vital component of S-103 activity.

Issue 6	"...objective 3c may be better suited under objective 4..."

Duly noted and change made in the proposal.

Issue 7	"...most of the research review reads as a disjoint collection of research that may have been completed without S-103..."

While the S-103 committee has been prolific in terms of its publication output, one area that admittedly needs improvement is the need to better document the interactions and collaborations that occur during regional research projects. However, even in the case of non-S103 related research that is conducted by individual researchers at one particular university, they have oftentimes consulted with colleagues at other institutions regarding the appropriate research methodology, data analysis techniques, etc. One cannot underestimate the importance of such informal interactions in conducted both basic and applied research.

Additionally, the committee has taken the stance of allowing the lead researcher(s) the opportunity to publish under their name, rather than an extensive list of authors. Particularly in the case of journal articles, there seems to be a gain in credibility (on the part of promotion and tenure committees) the fewer the number of authors. This is done in spite of the fact that several researchers may have been responsible for certain portions of the research study (i.e data collection) in their respective states. The committee recognizes this problem and has decided to make a concerted effort to consider more multi-authoring when publishing S-103 related research. It should be noted however, as the external reviewers did, that the S-103 project is comprised of individuals who are noted in their respective states and that these highly motivated researchers have a viable research programs that they are responsible for as well that address research issues that are directly applicable only in their respective states. Indirectly, however, they add to the collective knowledge base of the regional project through the informal interactions alluded to earlier.

It should be further noted that one of the more renowned research efforts of the S-103 committee had been the National Nursery Industry Survey that was first conducted in 1988, then subsequently in 1994, and most recently in the spring of 1999. Not only does this research include all of the S-103 participating states, but other non-participating states as well.

Issue 8	"...will the project produce significant results contributions in the horticultural field?..."

The research proposed in this project statement coincides with the mission of the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES). This mission is "to achieve significant and equitable improvements in domestic and global economic, environmental, and social conditions by advancing creative and integrated research, education, and extension programs in food, agricultural, and related sciences in partnership with both public and private sectors." Furthermore, the proposed research in this project statement supports goals 1, 4, and 5 of the Strategic Plan developed by the CSREES (Goal 1 - an agricultural production system that is highly competitive in the global economy, Goal 4 - greater harmony between agriculture and the environment, and Goal 5 - enhanced economic opportunity and quality of life for Americans). The cooperation of horticulturists and agricultural economists from around the United States that comprise the S-103 committee offer a unique resource to examine economic and environmental issues.

While the research work that focuses on the production-marketing system will contribute to the overall efficiency of the industry, much of the research will contribute to the applied sciences. Research dealing with new technologies and the application of these technologies contribute to the base of scientific knowledge that may lead to application in other horticultural areas, such as vegetable production. The work planned on biological control of insects, water-efficient pelletized container production systems, water holding capacity of various potting media, and alternative irrigation systems will contribute to the advancement of science. This water-related research will also contribute to the number one research area identified for the Southern Region by the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors in the August, 1992, report entitled Southern Strategic Research Plan.

EXTERNAL REVIEWS

Reviewer A

Review of S-103 Regional Research Project "Technical and Economical Efficiences of Producing, Marketing, and Managing Landscape Plants"

4.	Is the problem area within the scope of priorities set by the SAAESD or ESCOP in their planning documents?

To the best of my knowledge, the problem area is within the scope of these priorities.

5.	Does the Project Outline provide sufficient justification for pursuing research in the problem area based on a description of the problem(s) to be addressed and a review of previous work?

The Project Outline provides ample justification for pursuing the problem area and does an excellent job of reviewing the previous research. Although it is not mentioned until later in the Outline, I believe that an important justification for this regional project is that the industry is stratified by latitudinal plant hardiness zones, rather than by state, so a regional project eliminates the duplication of efforts that would arise from a state-by-state approach.

Is the review of literature contemporary and in sufficient detail to indicate that the investigators are familiar with previous work in the area?

The review of literature is more than adequate.

6.	Will the planned project make a significant contribution to new knowledge or provide a better understanding of existing knowledge?

The project promises to contribute significantly to new knowledge.

7.	For each objective, does the Project Outline describe examples of hypotheses that would be tested? Are these hypotheses clearly stated and testable?

With 23 cooperating agencies and 33 principal leaders from 21 states, the scope of this Project Outline does not lend itself to testing specific hypotheses. However, from statements in the objectives, it is often possible to infer many of the hypotheses that could be tested.

Are Methods described for collection and analysis of data, and are these methods appropriate for proposed experiments?

The methods described appear to be appropriate.

Can each objective be accomplished within the stated time period?

Some of the objectives are on-going evaluations that have already spanned several project lifetimes, but all appear to be capable of completion or continued contribution within the stated time period.

How could experimental design or data analysis be changed to improve each objective?

Again, the scope of this Project Outline is understandably too broad to include much detail on individual designs or analyses, but from what I know of the principal leaders and the past achievements of this regional project I feel confident that the investigators will use the best methods available.

8.	Do the methods proposed for each objective reflect contemporary technology?

The methods proposed are, for the most part, standard and well-accepted.

Are new, state-of-the art methods being used or attempted in the research?

Some of the methods represent innovative research approaches to the objectives, such as the application of the Internet for information transfer and marketing, computer-generated landscape designs for conjoint analysis, and Almost Ideal Demand Systems models.

In what ways could the proposed technical committee incorporate new methods into the project?

The innovative research approaches described above indicate that the committee is already actively considering such new methods.

9.	Is there bona-fide collaboration described for the project?

This project is remarkable for the high level of collaboration proposed, and is to be commended for the refreshing degree of collegiality and cooperation demonstrated among its members.

Are samples and specimens shared among scientists?

It is not apparent that samples and specimens per se need to be shared among the collaborators, but the sharing of data is clearly an important overall objective of this committee.

Are replicated experiments designed so they are clearly replicates?

This does not appear to be an important consideration in this proposal, but it seems likely that in such cases where replication is necessary the investigators can be trusted to conduct the experiments competently.

Are scientists assuming roles or tasks for an entire objective, such as conducting sample analyses for all sites?

This appears to be true for some objectives such as data management for the nation-wide survey in Objective 2, and conjoint analysis of landscape designs in Objective 3, where such consolidation is more efficient. However, in general the scientist in each state appear to have responsibility for generating the data for their state.

Is there evidence of cooperation in the way that the data will be collected, analyzed, shared and disseminated?

There is ample evidence of such cooperation over the last four projects and 24 years, and also in this proposal.

10.	Does the team of scientists include experts in complementary areas that will lead to true interdisciplinary efforts? For example, does the team include an appropriate complement of individuals with expertise in statistics and economics.

This team has an outstanding group of agricultural economists to complement the plant scientists. This is one of the few regional projects where there has been such a productive and synergistic collaboration between the natural and social sciences.

Are there other disciplines that should be added?

It is possible that experts in the disciplines of statistics and sociology might contribute to experiment and survey design, but since I am not familiar with the backgrounds of all the collaborators, it may well be that these disciplines are represented already.

What is the probability of success in light of past accomplishments and performance of the investigators?

The probability of success is high.

EXTERNAL REVIEWS

Reviewer B

Review of S-103 Regional Research Project "Technical and Economical Efficiences of Producing, Marketing, and Managing Landscape Plants"

Problem and Justification

•	Are limiting USDA resources allocated to the study of markets in this area sufficient to suggest it is "crucial that research mechanisms be developed"?

•	The evaluation of the economics of environmental issues facing the industry is a compelling raison d'etre for the project. It will play into production location decisions, trade patterns, and even regional or international competitiveness.

•	The gathering of cost-of-production data seems less interesting. Developing industry standards for cost accounting may be helpful, but what end is in mind when this team seeks to evaluate interregional competitive positions?

•	There needs to be a stronger argument for broad regional (national/international) assimilation and evaluation of cost-of-production data. Is the idea something like... there are too many products and production systems for any one person to maintain budgets, therefore we need to spread the tasks? Can budgets be meaningfully shared across production zones?

•	Are industry marketing inefficiencies prevalent? There is a vague allusion to the potential for the potential "misallocation of resources" in the face of rapid expansion. Will this be explicitly explored by the new group?

•	Technology transfer and its impact on production systems, regional trade, costs of production, and market structure should be an important issue for this group. Technology has changed fast and will play into the discussion of sustaining long-run competitiveness. This would perhaps be the better context around which to coordinate cost analysis for different products within an array of production systems.

•	Job creation for displaced agriculturalists (p.5) seems to be a rather secondary issue.

Objectives and Procedures

•	Objective 1- Can Behe & McNiel even scratch the surface of evaluating new horticultural practices? How did they settle on the ones mentioned in the proposal? Is there some way of having the project be more of a conduit of research coordination and extension spanning the South?

•	Baled budgets have been downloadable for many other enterprises and should be developed here on a central accessible site. Why not even have occasional surveys at the same site collecting individual costs and BMPs- at least starting with some of the more major enterprises. Set up a benchmarking system.

•	The economics of sustainable systems is a great idea and much needed (why not list it first under 1.D.?).

•	Objective 2- language here referring to the S-103 members is awkward. Is the committee continuing? The IMPLAN stuff is OK but can become rather academic if simply descriptive. Perhaps using these impact-type analyses as input for economic development decision makers or for state-level strategic planning would be a more useful application. "It is important that the green industry's contribution to ag and the economy be empirically documented..." Why?

•	I like the data gathering links formed with state nursery associations. Is there a feedback intent following the data assimilation and analysis? Can a link to the AAN be forged here? I realize this is principally a research orientation , but an outreach component would be most relevant here.

•	Objective 3- I like the consumer attribute preference vs plant professional attribute preference comparisons here. The use of conjoint analysis makes sense and I would expect some interesting results. Any way to go to the next level and propose the development of regular tools commercial horticulturalists can employ to monitor and adapt to changing consumer preferences on an on-going basis?

•	The demand studies can be useful. I've often wondered, though, how much our economic demand studies have been employed by the business community to "help them segment markets and more effectively target products and services." Much of what is really meaningful to these folks is highly dependent on their specific market situation. The AIDS models are very general. Perhaps an outreach component could be proposed with this effort, as well.

•	Advertising effectiveness should be of compelling interest to the garden centers. The methods and evaluation services are provided by private companies like IRI and Nielson. Is there a strong justification for why public funds should go to help garden centers better advertise? There may be, but it needs to be argued for here. Wouldn't this fit sub-objective better with objective 4?

•	Objective 4- See my comments on the last point above regarding justification. Using the economic jargon, what is the public good here that is failing absent the effort of these capable scientists?

Final points on overall proposal content:

I like the objectives, generally. This group has a long history of very productive support for the nursery and greenhouse industry. New markets, new technologies, changing production and distribution structures, and the ever-increasing array of products makes this a challenging but exciting field. The regional effort is well justified.

On point A-G per the Guidelines for External Review

1.	Yes.

2.	There is sufficient justification for pursuing research in the problem area. The literature review reflects the most current work in the area. Much of the most important literature has been contributed by the scientist who will be continuing work in this area.

3.	The planned project will make significant contribution to new knowledge. The scientists should be encouraged to expedite the delivery of their findings to extension and industry sources in this rapidly changing industry.

4.	Each objective has clear and testable hypotheses. The methods are clearly identified and appropriate. Each objective should be able to be accomplished within the stated time. There are no specific modifications or improvements to experimental design that appear necessary.

5.	Research methods are contemporary.

6.	A bona-fide collaboration is evident. The scientists should be encouraged to continue to be more innovative in sharing their results and working closely with industry sources.

7.	There is strong complementarity between these scientists. They have established a history of productive collaboration across states.

EXTERNAL REVIEWS

Reviewer C

Review of S-103 Regional Research Project "Technical and Economical Efficiences of Producing, Marketing, and Managing Landscape Plants"

•	Scope of priorities

The project proposal, as written, falls within the board CSREES guidelines presented in the middle of page 5. Such a large contributor to the income and employment in the agricultural sector couldn't help but address this mission. One challenge to the group is to incorporate more environmental policy and management issues in their research. Currently, the environmental component of the project is more assumed than explicitly discussed.

•	Sufficient justification; knowledge of the literature

I struggle with the uniqueness of the problems facing the green industry and whether this effort warrants a regional project. I say this as a strong supporter of the group's previous work and a supporter of this new proposal. I find this effort broad, diffuse and difficult to characterize scientifically. Research output is indeed impressive but has the group grapped with the issues that are critical to the industry. It is not clear what value has been added to the industry.

•	Significant contribution

This research group is to be congratulated for establishing themselves as green industry experts within a professional culture oriented towards traditional agriculture. They all took professional risks and now have the reputation as being the leading source of analytical information on the green industry for other academics. The review of their productivity found in the proposal is indeed impressive. I would like to know which conferences and symposia the group sponsored over the years. I also would encourage the researchers to publish in more mainstream journals while continuing their fine publication record in trade publications.

I believe the proposed project has the potential to make significant contributions in the demand side of the green industry. As an economist I'm particularly excited about the proposed work on consumer preferences, demand, and advertising. The marketing/merchandising objective (#4) will produce valuable information for the industry, assuming active industry involvement. It is difficult for me to judge the integration of the horticultural and economic activities; the integration across objectives could be more clearly described. Green industry managers operate in an interrelated business system so our work should recognize the fact and our recommendations should contribute to the efficiency of that system.

•	Hypotheses

No clear hypotheses are stated in the objectives. Data will be gathered, evaluated, and reported. I question whether cost of production (COP) studies represent research (p. 16). COP is important but only as a tool or input for policy analysis and testing industrial organization hypotheses.

•	Contemporary technology- state of the art methods

I'm not a horticulturists but I found the entire proposal lacking in scientific horticulture content, particularly in the new proposal. Will this project produce significant contributions in the horticulture field? The econometric methods proposed for the consumer preferences and demand studies appear to be appropriate and have the potential to make a professional contribution. I would encourage the group to continue working in the industrial organization area and focus more on environmental management. Regional competitiveness should continue as an area of emphasis in the new project.

•	Collaboration/cooperation

First, it is notable that other than Oregon, no western states are included in this project. The omission of California is unfortunate because of the size of the green industry in the state. I encourage the group to find a California collaborator or two.

Secondly, it is not clear what the past, present, and future role of industry is in this research project. How do industry representatives work with the researchers to identify important problems? How do industry representatives use the results of this research? What is the extension component of this project?

Thirdly, like most regional projects it is difficult to coordinate a single research effort by 20 states. S-103 has had some success in this area (e.g. competitiveness/trade model) but the group should be encouraged to do more collaborative work. Currently, most of the research review reads as a disjoint collection of research that may have been completed without S-103.

•	Team

As mentioned before, I'm not sure how this project is "balanced" between horticulturists and economists. These individuals are the leading experts on the green industry in the U.S. but I couldn't claim that they represent a team of experts. They come together as a team for a select number of coordinated research efforts but operate as state-based researchers for most of the year. However, I don't see this as a problem given their fine research record and the logistical challenges of coordinating regional/national research. These researchers have made a valid attempt to carry out a truly regional project.

CRITICAL REVIEW

Review of Work Accomplished

The initial S-103 regional technical research committee (1976-1982) entitled "Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Ornamentals in the South" was concerned with input-output relationships and costs of producing specific plant species including Kurume azaleas, crape myrtles, dogwood, forsythia, Buford holly, Pfitzer juniper, and pin oaks(Badenhop, et al., 1979; Badenhop and Wright, 1980; Badenhop and Einert, 1980; Smith, 1980; Smith and McConnell, 1981; S-103 Committee, 1979). A series of regional publications, a proceedings of a symposium sponsored by the Tennessee Valley Authority for the American Association of Nurserymen, and other publications have reported results of this research. In these documents, the advantages of various production regions in competing for markets were delineated. Data relating to prices, product mix, distribution patterns, and other characteristics of marketing were analyzed, along with sales invoices from representative samples of nurserymen (Free and Vitelli, 1979; Gamble, 1979; Massey, 1979; Phillips, 1979; Einert, 1979; Badenhop, 1979; Smith and McConnell, 1979; Smith, 1979; McNiel, 1979; Wright, 1979; Crafton, et al., 1982).

The second authorized S-103 project (1982-1987), "Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Ornamentals" focused on physical and economic modeling of both container and field nurseries in USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5 and 6 (Northern States) and in USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 7 and 8 (Southern and Southeastern States) using economic-engineering techniques (Badenhop and Phillips, 1983; Taylor, et al., 1983; Dickerson, et al., 1983; Badenhop, et al., 1985; Badenhop and Glasgow, 1985; Crafton and Phillips, 1984; Phillips, 1984; Crafton, et al., 1982; Perry, et al., 1987). Production depicted by these model nurseries represented the vast majority of the dollar volume of nursery sales from these production regions. Cost differences among species were determined to be caused primarily by differing space requirements, length of production cycles, cost of liners, and over-wintering needs. While the previous studies were not completely comparable because of differences in species studied, year of study, size of plants and assumptions, basic analysis of the data clearly showed cost-of-production advantages for the South.

Profitability of firms in the landscape nursery industry (growers, wholesalers, retailers, repackers and rewholesalers, contractors, etc.) is directly associated with competitiveness in production and in the marketplace. Hence, competitiveness can be measured at the regional level as well as among individual firms. Cost leadership is but one factor influencing the competitive advantage of a production region and/or firm (Coutu and Vitelli, 1979; Phillips, 1979; Free and Vitelli, 1980; Vitelli and Free, 1980; Hinson, 1983; Phillips and Badenhop, 1983; Phillips, 1984), although previous research efforts concentrated on developing baseline cost-of-production data.

Marketing research focused primarily on transportation and distribution of plant material from state to state or region to region (Badenhop, 1981; Doerer, et al., 1982; Williams and Musillo, 1984). Economic analyses and studies of marketing strategies used by industry firms were also conducted (Smith and McConnell, 1979; Phillips, 1984). Although comparative advantage evaluations were conducted between production regions and representative states producing landscape plants, ultimate success by any particular business still hinged on the micro-economic environment within that firm (Gunter, 1979; Hymum and Phillips, 1979; Trieb, 1979; Phillips and Ward, 1980; Smith and McConnell, 1981; Perry and Badenhop, 1982; Crafton and Phillips, 1984).

The third research effort (1987-1993) conducted by the S-103 technical research committee entitled "Technical and Economical Efficiencies of Producing and Marketing Landscape Plants" focused on five interrelated issues. These topics included: (a) budgeting and economics, (b) technical production aspects, (c) firm management, (d) marketing, and (e) interregional competition. Each topic will be discussed separately.

Previous budgeting and economics work by the S-103 committee (1976-1982 and 1982-1987) concentrated on the development of enterprise budgets estimating the cost of producing specific landscape plant species. This approach was expanded and modified into whole-firm modeling utilizing economic-engineering and operations research procedures. The 1987-1993 research effort expanded the scope of analyses in three ways. First, budgets were developed and costs estimated for representative container and field nursery production firms in selected USDA Plant Hardiness Zones, a stratification previously not studied nor reported. Examples of the economic results (Hall, et al., 1987; Phillips, 1989; Perry, et al., 1990; and Foshee, et al., 1990) provided a baseline of economic data observations (capital costs, labor and equipment requirements, operating expenditures, and firm and species profitability) differentiated by size of firm and species of plants stratified by latitudinal plant hardiness zones, which eliminated duplication that would result from a state-by-state approach. Second, the types of landscape plant products studied were expanded to include diverse production systems, such as turfgrass, perennials, and tissue culture, as well as container-grown, field-grown, and greenhouse-grown landscaping plants (Kizer, et al, 1987; Hall, et al., 1987; Taylor, et al., 1990; and Stegelin and Powell, 1991). Third, the industry sectors analyzed from a budgeting perspective were expanded beyond wholesale growers to include landscape contractors, landscape maintenance firms, and retail garden centers (Barton, et al., 1992). The procedure used for this work was to analyze existing firms recognized as leaders in their respective sectors in order to construct hypothetical firms with representative costs to permit economic comparisons and development of economic guidelines. While considerable progress was made, additional costs and returns studies are needed because of the diverse nature of the greenhouse/nursery industry.

Technological advances in the landscape plant industry have impacted production practices of nurserymen economically and procedurally. With the development of new technology resulting from either scientific advances, legislative edict, changes in consumer and marketing demand, or environmental policy concerns, horticulturalists and agricultural economists participating in S-103 cooperatively conducted several analyses of the applications and economic worthiness of these technologies in the landscape plant industry. Specific studies analyzed biological control of insects, water-efficient pelletized container production systems, water holding capacity of various potting media, pelletized tree production, grow-bag in-ground plant production, alternative irrigation methods, and alternative weed control strategies (Hood, et al., 1987; Taylor, et al., 1989; Tinga, 1988; Aitken, et al., 1990; Alverson, et al., 1990; Eakes, et al., 1990; Gilliam, et al., 1990; Eakes, et al., 1991a; Eakes,et al., 1991b; Briggs and Green, 1991; Robbins, et al., 1991; and Roberts, 1991). While considerable progress was made, continuing pressure for environmental consciousness and for firms to remain financially competitive necessitated the need to continue the study of alternative plant production and maintenance systems.

The predominance of decision-maker, problem-solver, management-oriented research conducted and published during the tenure of S-103 has had firm-level emphasis affecting the economic "bottom line" of producers and marketers of landscape plants. Issues addressed by the technical research committee include optimal product mix, cash flows, pricing strategies, and computer applications (Kizer, et al., 1987; Phillips, 1988; Hall and Phillips, 1989; Phillips and Hall, 1990; Rhodus and Taylor, 1990; Hall and Phillips, 1990;Turner, 1990; Phillips, 1991; Hall and Phillips., 1991; and Barton, et al., 1994). Additional research was needed to extend the information available to industry participants regarding management of biological systems, production technologies, and resource protection and management.

Published marketing research by S-103 committee members has also had a predominant emphasis on the competitive nature of the marketplace and firm management and marketing strategies that take advantage of opportunities available to the firm or region. In part, the status of the general economy influenced this shift in research agenda. As such, the structure, conduct and performance (industrial organization) of the industry were the attention of studies of the competitive market situation and environment (Taylor, et al., 1989; Turner and Stegelin, 1989; Ames, 1990; Behe, et al., 1990; Hodges and Haydu, 1990; Phillips, et al., 1990; Bauer and Brooker, 1991; Brooker, 1991). Several states either completed studies to estimate the aggregate economic impact of the turfgrass industry or to examine the marketing practices of turf producers (Adrian, et al., 1985 and 1986; Stegelin and Powell, 1991; and Adrian, et al., 1992). Continuation of this work is critical to the development of benchmark data for use in analyses of adjustments in the industrial organization of the nursery industry and to perform cross-sectional marketing analyses. ditional marketing research focused on the consumer, including purchase expenditures, buying patterns, product selection and other purchasing behavior (Ames and Einert, 1987; Gineo and Omamo, 1990; Turner, 1989; Gineo, 1989; Turner and Fletcher, 1989; Turner, et al., 1990; Turner and Dorfman, 1990; Hall, 1991; Johnson, et al., 1991; Stegelin, 1991; Turner, 1991; and Turner and Dorfman, 1991).

Analyzing interregional the trade flows and marketing practices of landscape plant producers throughout the United States was a primary objective of the 1987-1993 S-103 project. All states with technical committee representation participated, along with solicited assistance and participation in many other states. The primary summation report was published as a Southern Cooperative Series Bulletin (Brooker and Turner, 1990). Several cooperating states published individual reports (Brooker, 1989; Brooker and Bryan, 1989; Bryan and Brooker, 1989; Adrian, et al., 1990; and Stegelin and McNiel, 1990), including some publications cited in the earlier marketing section. The competitive relationships among states and regions continues to be a major issue as business managers make financial and marketing decisions regarding future investments and economic strategies.

The fourth research effort (1993-1998) conducted by the S-103 technical research committee ("Technical and Economical Efficiencies of Producing, Marketing, and Managing Environmental Plants") had three stated objectives: (1) evaluate alternative landscape (environmental) plant production, establishment, and maintenance systems, (2) evaluate the regional competitiveness within the landscape (environmental plant) industry, and (3) evaluate the demand for landscape (environmental) plants, materials, and services. Work accomplished pertaining to each of these objectives is discussed separately.

Objective 1: Evaluate alternative landscape (environmental) plant production, establishment and maintenance systems.

Plant production research included the evaluation of the economic feasibility of growing selected tree species to larger sizes (Tilt, et al., 1994a). The closed, insulated pallet system (CIPS) is an innovative plant production system designed to reduce nursery industry problems with water runoff (Briggs and green, 19940. Research with CIPS has indicated that Phytophthora cinnamomi does not spread from inoculated to noninoculated root pouches. Over 40 genera of plants have grown equally well or better in CIPS compared with open container systems (OCS). Container nursery production is more profitable in CIPS than in OCS. Establishment and maintenance of beneficial microorganisms, such as Trichoderma harzianum is enhanced in CIPS. Water and fertilizer use in CIPS is approximately 90% less than that applied in the overhead irrigated open container systems. There is no fertilizer or irrigation water effluent from CIPS. Plants are more tolerant of saline irrigation water in CIPS (Green, et al., 1993).

Relative costs and returns for selected plants grown using infield, above-ground container and pot-in-pot production methods were evaluated for a 10-acre nursery with a five acre production area and a three year growing cycle. Pot-in-pot systems had high initial capital outlay which resulted in higher fixed cost per plant. However, less intensive cultural practices and increased plant numbers resulted in the lowest per plant cost for the alternative system (Tilt, et al, 1994).

Several projects were completed that evaluated alternative plant production regimes. These included an economic analysis of Arizona Ash sequentially produced in copper-treated and non-treated containers (Obst, et al.,1996), a determination of optimal marketing strategies for container-based production systems (Stokes, et al., 1996), an evaluation of the production of turfgrass-sod as an alternative farm enterprise (Adrian, et al., 1996), an evaluation of stock plant etiolation and shoot age effects of histology and adventitious root formation in stem cuttings of Carpinus betulus L. 'fastigiata' (Maynard and Bassuk, 1996), an evaluation of the economic feasibility of micro irrigating container grown plants (Haydu and Beeson, 1997), an analysis of the growth and development of euphorbia pulcherrima and pelargonium x hortorum in shredded rubber-containing substrates (Baquir and Harkness, 1997), and estimating the cost of producing container-grown landscape plants with the assistance of computer accounting software (Foshee, et al., 1997).

In addition, studies are nearing completion on turf response to an N release from new coated urea fertilizers (Williams, et al., 1997), greenhouse production and landscape responses of petunia and pansy to copper coated containers, cell size, and extended production schedules (Arnold and Lang, 1997), the impacts of copper leaching from Cu (OH)2-treated containers on water recycling, nursery run-off, and growth of bald cypress and corn (Arnold, et al., 1997). Furthermore, the effect of low water quality and quantity on container plant production was evaluated (Green, 1996), as was the efficacy of using Ethephon during New Guinea impatiens production to delay flowering (Burney and Harkness, 1997). Another recycling study evaluated using calcium carbonate to reduce zinc toxicity in media containing shredded tires, while container production of small trees under kenaf and coconut coir pith was analyzed (Goyne and Arnold, 1996). Finally, an evaluation of rooting rhodendendron without mist was completed (Holt, et al., 1996) and using stock plant shading to increase rooting of paperbark maple cuttings was investigated (Maynard, et al., 1996).

Several projects were completed that evaluated alternative production systems. Chrysanthemum cultivars were shown to respond negatively to shredded tire rubber in the growing medium (Britt and Harkness, 1997). Cultivars bred for greenhouse pot plant culture had leaf tip burn after 5 days in the media and were dead within two weeks. Cultivars bred for use as fall garden mums tolerated the rubber at 10% application levels but never grew as large as the controls. Geraniums were also grown in the shredded rubber media under drip, hand, or ebb and flood irrigation. Leachate samples were collected bi-weekly and were analyzed for pH, soluble salts, and zinc content. At the end of the experiments, foliage samples were also collected and analyzed for mineral content. Another project examined the economics of pulsed cyclic micro-irrigation in container production (Haydu and Beeson, 1997). With water issues rising to increased prominence in Florida, examining the efficacy of alternative technologies provides useful information for nursery growers, the industry and policy makers.

A survey of greenhouse managers has been conducted to determine products produced and the use of various production technologies. These variables might be associated with firm size (TN). The data assembly was begun to update research on costs of producing selected floricultural crops in Climatic Zones 7 and 8. The previous research is 15 years old and needed to be revised as to crops and greenhouse and plant production technology (Brooker, et al., 1996). An evaluation of post-transplant root regeneration and field establishment of container-grown Shumard Oak through mechanical correction and chemical avoidance of circling roots (Arnold, 1996) was completed. A comparison of seed rate, spacing and weed control methods in a Virginia meadow (Harkness and Lyons, 1997) was also completed. Research in the adaptability of native grasses for southeastern humid conditions has resulted in the evaluation of Buffalograss (Buchloe dactyloides) cultivars Texoka and Topgun at 23 cm spacing and 23 and 30 cm spacing, respectively. Seedling little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) at 11.2, 27.4 and 48.8 kg plants/ha provided an acceptable stand when measured visually at any of the rates. Four cultivars of little bluestem (SCS#9029926, Pastura, Aldous and Cimmeron), 'Alamo' switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) and 'Haskell' sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula) were studied (Aiken, 1995). SCS# and 'Aldous' little bluestem cultivars were superior to the other little bluestem cultivars in plant height and coverage. 'Alamo' switchgrass was much taller and thicker than all the other grass cultivars. The sideoats grama was the shortest of the species.

The comparison study of little bluestem cultivars and 'Alamo' switchgrass completed the second year in the field. 'Alamo' switchgrass is the dominant grass in this study with the seeded plots significantly taller than the transplanted plots and all of the little bluestem cultivar plants both seeded and transplanted. Percent plant coverage was not significantly different between switchgrass and little bluestem cultivars SCS 9029926 and 'Aldous' but was different from little bluestem cultivars 'Pastura' and 'Cimmeron.' Biomass data shows the switchgrass significantly greater than the other species. SCS 9029926 little bluestem cultivar seeded and transplanted was the best of the bluestem cultivars in each of the growth indices. Seeding the species tended to produce a better stand and growth than transplanting in each of the cultivars. Application of Plateau and Roundup herbicide significantly reduced growth of bahiagrass and suppressed seedhead development and suppressed seedhead development for 8 weeks after application (Aiken, 1995).

A host of articles were published concerning pest management in the greenhouse and nursery industry and for landscape maintenance firms (Garber, et al., 1996a; Garber and Hudson, 1996;Hudson, et al., 1996; Garber and Bondari, 1996;Garber, et al.,1996b) ) (GA). Auxiliary articles were published on chemical (Garber, et al., 1996c), disease (Garber, et al., 1996d), insect (Norcini et al., 1996), and weed control (Gilliam, et al., 1990). Another project has evaluated the use of copper paints and copper-treated burlap for the control of rooting out in B&B nursery stock during holding in wholesale and retail yards (Maynard, 1997). In addition, copper polymers are being evaluated for use in controlling circling of plant roots within containers(Maynard, 1997).

Objective 2: Evaluate the regional competitiveness within the landscape (environmental) plant industry.

Nineteen states from within the project and 5 additional states cooperated to conduct an ornamental plants trade flow survey designed as a follow-up to the 1989 survey. After input from committee members to improve the survey instrument the survey was mailed to certified nurseries in 24 states. Using the Dillman approach (which consists of mail out, follow-up postcard, and remailing the entire package to those who have not responded, within a specified time frame), a response of about 1,350 usable questionnaires was achieved. "Trade Flows and Marketing Practices within the United States Nursery Industry", was published in hard copy and on the World Wide Web (Brooker, 1995)

Using a landscape/retail nursery firm case as an example, the use of employee empowerment to increase productivity and to assist in managerial control was studied. The firm's objective was to release owner time for design and sales activities, while using empowerment of hired managers to maintain profitability and the firm's image as a high quality supplier of services and plants. In the first year, communication to managers and other employees about empowerment and its responsibilities, combined with insufficient control and a declining economy led to a deteriorating financial condition for the firm. Subsequently, communications and personnel turnover, combined with budgeting for control, restored profitability. The case illustrated that a management information system must be available as feedback. Then the empowerment concept can allow decision-making to flow toward the point where work takes place (Hinson and Ackroyd, 1994).

Change of product ownership in competitive agricultural industries is a critical event, yet little research has examined the transaction methods used by firms and the corresponding factors that influence the choice of transaction method. A sample of landscape plant nurseries across the U.S. provided data to model this decision. Transaction methods included sales by telephone, personal visits, mail order, and at trade shows. In addition, factors that influenced negotiated sales were investigated. Influential factors included age of the business, size (as measured by gross sales), location, market channel use, ownership structure, and perspective on competitive situation. Using a tobit estimation procedure, profiles of nursery firms more likely to use a particular transaction method were developed (Hinson, et al., 1995).

Two surveys of the Tennessee nursery industry completed in 1989 and 1994 focused on plant sales to three types of market outlets and the destination of these shipments by state (Brooker, 1996). Wholesale sales accounted for 89% and 93% of annual sales in 1988 and 1993, respectively. With respect to re-wholesalers, the percentage of annual sales to states in the southeast and northeastern regions declined, but sales to re-wholesalers in the north central states and the south central states increased dramatically. The distribution of annual shipments to landscapers decreased in the northeastern region and increased in the north central region. The share of wholesale sales to Tennessee landscapers remained about the same. The major north central states are Kentucky and Ohio. The larger volume states in the northeastern region are Maryland and Virginia. Shipments to out-of-state retailers increased to other southeastern and north central states, but declined to states in the northeast region. In contrast to wholesale sales to landscapers and re-wholesalers, the percentage share of shipments to outlets in Tennessee decreased from 15 to 4 percent. A study was completed which investigated the tax implications resulting from various nursery organizational structures and product mix scenarios. The impact of "holding over" containerized nursery stock for future sale as larger sized plant materials was assessed. (Stokes, et al., 1996).

An evaluation has been conducted of the feasibility (competitive position) of alternative warm season turfgrass-sod species: bermudagrass, centipedegrass, and zoysiagrass. Analysis are based on budgets developed for south Alabama which would be representative of USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 8. These data were entered into a multiperiod linear programming model to evaluate optimal combinations of grasses to maximize net return over a seven-year planning period. These data were also used to evaluate the feasibility of turfgrass-sod production on an on-going farm operation in this region (Adrian, et al., 1995).

Louisiana trade flows of woody ornamental plants was compared between 1988 and 1993. By kind, the customer base diversified (smaller proportion of sales to each kind of customer) for retailers and rewholesalers, while the portion of sales to landscapers increased. By destination, nurseries with in-state share of sales between 25% and 75% increased from 47% to 93% while in-state sales greater than 75% declined. The west south central region (including Texas) became more important. These changes reflect that in 1988, a national economic slowdown was occurring which worsened a concurrent decline in crude oil prices, and industry wide expansion of production was marketed during the slowdown, intensifying competition (Hinson, 1996).

A study was also completed on out-of-state sales by U.S. landscape plant producers to investigate influential factors (Turner, et al., 1996). The impact of competition and structural change on Florida's ornamental plant nursery and golf course industry was evaluated (Haydu, et al., 1996). In addition, the economic contribution of Florida's and Louisiana's turfgrass industry was evaluated (Haydu, et al., 1996; Hinson and Hughes, 1997). Using data from the 1989 and 1994 S-103 national marketing surveys, the southern states market share was evaluated (Brooker, 1996) as were trade flows between states (Brooker, 1996), nurserymen's marketing practices (Brooker, 1996), and factors perceived to limit growth (Brooker, 1996).

Objective 3: Evaluate the demand for landscape (environmental) plants, materials and service.

The size and impact of the nursery/landscape industry was evaluated with a variety of tactics (NV, GA, NC, TX). A national data base of number of retail garden centers has been used to estimate population thresholds. This project uses count data procedures for estimation of thresholds. This potentially will produce better results than the ordinary least squares procedures. Count data procedures have been extended to incorporate dependency between numbers of garden centers and number of other retail shops. These procedures will incorporate retail shop dependency (Deller and Harris, 1993).

A two-year study was completed that investigated the size and scope of turfgrass-related industries in Texas. This project analyzed the amount of turf and nursery products that are produced in the state, the amounts and value of inputs used in the production/distribution of turfgrass, and the value added to these products as they move through the marketing system. An input-output modeling approach will be used to determine the full economic impact of the turfgrass industry in Texas (Lard and Hall, 1996). In an analysis of the competitive relationship of three warm-season turfgrass species, variation in the prices of the different grasses had little impact on the profit maximizing combination of grasses within current observable price ranges. Bermudagrass, with its shorter production cycle and positive influence on cash flow, dominates the higher-valued, longer production-cycle grasses (Adrian, et al.,1994).

The importance of the green industry in the United States economy is being investigated. The goal of the study is to describe the relative size of this industry in terms of employment, output, and value added. A similar study has been completed for the Georgia economy. Results indicate that within Georgia production agriculture, the green industry ranked second in terms of employment, third in terms of output (annual gross sales), and third in terms of value added (Turner and Kriesel, 1994). Data describing the status and nature of Alabama's ornamental plant industry were also summarized and published (Behe, et al., 1990). The contribution of the Green industry to the Louisiana economy was determined. A $1 increase in sales by producers resulted in a $1.4291 multiple in economic activity when household spending was excluded, and by $1.9930 when household spending was included. Similar multipliers for landscape/horticultural services were $1.4907 and $2.8920 (Hinson and Hughes, 1997).

The following two publications have been revised to include current data (DC): Statistical Bulletin 817, Floriculture and Environmental Horticulture Products, a Production and Marketing Statistical Review, 1960-88. Statistical Bulletin 862, Financial Performance of U.S. Floriculture and Environmental Horticulture Farm Businesses, 1987-91 (Johnson, 1990). The relative size of the green industry within the U.S. economy and how it is linked to supporting industries through the volume of transactions and economic impact multipliers was examined. This analysis was based on IMPLAN, an input-output model developed by the U.S. Forest Service. In terms of 1990 employment, the green industry was the second leading employer in U.S. production agriculture. In terms of output, the greenhouse and products sector ranked sixth within production agriculture (Turner and Kriesel, 1995). A survey of the commercial members of the Perennial Plant Association (PPA) indicated that gross sales of perennials by PPA members for 1994 was an estimated $1.38 billion, with 29% of this amount generated from sales of perennial plants. Sales of perennials increased over 1993 levels for 86% of all respondents. The most popular genus sold in the U.S. for 1994 was Hosta, followed by: Hemerocallis, Coreopsis, Chrysanthemum, and Astilbe (Rhodus and Hoskins, 1995).

A review of the current literature on consumer preferences for plant materials from retail outlets is in progress. Sections will include an introduction with an overview of the economic impact of the green industry, an overview of market research in individual states, general demographic data on garden center consumers, a summary of consumer preference research and an overview of the landscape industry as it relates to preferences of retail consumers (Barton, et al., 1997). A grant was received from the Bedding Plants Foundation, Inc. to investigate consumers' decision-making process and preferences for geranium by simultaneously defining the importance of and preferences for (1) flower color, (2) leaf variegation, and (3) price (Behe, et al, 1997). Consumer research was conducted in garden centers to investigate preference s for geraniums by asking the flower color, leaf variegation, and price combinations (viewed in photographs on display board) they would or would not purchase. Red and lavender were the preferred colors, while zonal and plain were the most preferred leaf variegation, and low prices were preferred. A simulated blue geranium was not popular as it consistently ranked in the lower third of the preferred combinations. Another product demand that was investigated using focus groups was windflower sod (Barton, et al., 1996). The demand for ornamental products in North Carolina was also investigated (Abdalmagid, et al., 1996). Two focus groups (homeowners, landscape professionals) were used to study the acceptance of wildflower sod as a landscape product. The reaction of both groups was positive. Homeowners believed the wildflower sod to be an interesting product for relatively small spaces (Barton, et al., 1996). The own price and income elasticities of the largest selling plants and shrubs are being estimated. Lesser selling plants will be grouped by general categories to estimate their elasticities ((Abdelmagid, et al., 1995).

A study on the impact of population threshold levels on rural nursery retail businesses found that less population was required if other retail firms were present (Shonwiler and Harris, 1996). A North Carolina study explored factors that influence a consumer's selection of a garden center (Safley and Wohlgenant, 1995), while a Georgia study examined customer defections (Stegelin, 1996). Another effective tool to assist retailers of landscape material is image assessment. This was used in Texas to determine image and reputation in a local trade area (Hall, 1996). New studies that assess the image of competing retail garden centers within local trade areas are underway. The survey instrument used for primary data collection has been refined based on feedback from previous surveys. It is anticipated that a compilation of consumer perceptions may be extrapolated to provide regional trends regarding customer perceptions of retail garden centers (Hall, 1996).

Research revealed that consumers preferred poinsettia cultivars when compared to other colors (Behe, et al., 1997). Consumer preferences for geranium flower color, leaf variegation, and price in five U.S. markets were investigated and again red was the preferred color (Behe, et al., 1997). Lagerstroemia 'Victor' and 'Zuni' were studied for use as a potted florist crop (Rawson and Harkess, 1997). Experiments were conducted on number and timing of pinching, fertilization rate, and photoperiod response. Pinching and timing of the pinch did not significantly affect the overall size or shape of the plants. Planting 3 liners per 15 cm diameter container provided a larger plant than only 1 liner. The plants are photoperiodic requiring long days for vegetative growth and flowering. Growing the plants under 4 to 8 weeks of short days before moving into long days resulted in the highest quality plants. Applying 200 mg/l N from a 20-10-20 liquid feed once per week or 6 g of 15-11-13 slow release fertilizer resulted in optimum plant growth. Another project is evaluating the growing and marketing requirements of new sustainable plant species for introduction to the nursery industry (Maynard, 1996).

Following up on a study of the demand for labor in Florida's turfgrass industry was an examination of associated labor issues affecting turf-related enterprises (Haydu and Hodges, 1996). A similar project developed a business management oriented teaching case for a small nursery and landscape business (Hinson, et al., 1994). The focus was on an employee empowerment program that moved decision-making closer to the work site. The case used balance sheets and owner description of objectives and implementation to show the firm's changing managerial structure in its attempts to encourage employee initiative and entrepreneurship, thus capturing the potential advantage of a decentralized management style. The case suggests caution since not all managers want to be in an empowered environment, and the learning curve in implementing this system may be a significant factor. Turf acreage and maintenance costs conducted by various states were summarized by the major strata. This data will serve as a basis for estimating the size and relative importance of the US turfgrass industry (Stegelin,and Powell, 1991; White, et al., 1991; Adrian, et al., 1992; Hinson and Hughes, 1996; Haydu, et al., 1996; Lard and Hall, 1996). The demand for labor in Florida's turfgrass industry was evaluated (Cisar and Haydu, 1991).

Research was conducted on consumer perceptions and expectations of garden center products service quality (Hudson, et al., 1997). Another project investigated the stability of target markets for landscape plants over a nine year period (Turner, 1997). The different outlets analyzed in this study were large retail stores (Kmart, Walmart, etc.), large lawn and garden centers (Pikes, etc.), and local lawn and garden centers. Economic models were developed to identify factors that would explain the percentage of plants purchased at different outlets. Each equation was estimated using a tobit procedure. The results confirm previous results that different target markets exist for different types of retail outlets for landscape plants.

A World Wide Web site on the Internet was developed during 1995 to disseminate research findings and general program information related to the S-103 Regional Research Committee. Titled, "EnviroPlants Research," this site carries a complete description of the project objectives, project participants, and results of the 1994 survey that documented trade flows and marketing practices within the United States nursery industry for 1993. Additional publications and links to other Internet resources are also available. The URL address for this site is: http://hortwww-2.ag.ohio-state.edu/s103/s103.html.

Degree to Which Objectives Have Been Accomplished

Considerable progress was made with the first objective. Production-oriented studies have contributed to the success in meeting the goals established under this objective. Also, the modeling of production systems to represent landscape plants grown in the various hardiness zones yielded baseline data for some plant categories and resulted in revisions of earlier economic engineering studies. However, the vast number of different horticultural products, continuing technological advances, and increasing environmental concerns, all preclude the possibility that this objective could be completely fulfilled.

Because of relatively new territory covered by marketing and demand analysis in the landscape (environmental) plant industry, the need is still sizable. The survey work and evaluation of structural issues and alternative marketing systems provides a solid base for expanded evaluation of wholesaling and retailing issues. The numerous publications associated with this objective reveal that a great deal of work was accomplished during the project period. However, product complexity with regard to grades, the issue of price discovery, and the need for reliable estimates of demand and supply elasticities leave much opportunity for further research.

Areas Needing Further Investigation

The exceptional growth experienced by the nursery/greenhouse industry during the 1980s presented renewed interest by nurserymen in the profitability of firms in the landscape nursery industry, which includes growers, wholesalers, retailers, repackers, and landscape contractors. Basically, profitability is derived largely from the competitiveness in production and in the marketplace. Cost leadership is but one factor influencing the competitive advantage of a production region and/or a firm, although previous research efforts primarily concentrated on developing baseline cost-of-production data as the logical first step to broader, market competitiveness analysis.

Farmers of traditional agricultural crops are investigating horticultural crops as an alternative enterprise. Additional production studies and the impact of increased supplies on the competitive relationships between states and regions needs to be examined. Competitiveness can be measured at the regional level as well as among individual firms. Insight provided by programming models can help industry participants, both growers and marketers, make better decisions regarding long-run investments. If major economic forces that are going to readjust the sources of primary supplies in the long run can be anticipated, then industry participants and public agencies working with this industry will be in a better position to make economically rational decisions.

Marketing of landscape (environmental) horticultural products continues to be a challenging issue. Additional insight regarding the purchasing behavior of consumers should help retailers, wholesalers, and producers to satisfy the desires of consumers. While several S-103 studies have focused on consumer demand, market demand analysis is still relatively new in the horticultural products area. The absence of time series data adequate for price and demand analysis necessitates the collection of primary data. A third nationwide survey of nurserymen is needed (and is underway) to be able to measure structural changes occurring within the nursery/greenhouse industry. Additional surveys of consumers, landscape firms, and retailers need to be conducted to support analyses of the changing structure, behavior and performance of firms comprising these subsectors of the overall landscape (environmental) plant industry.

A continuing and difficult question concerns the potential for growth by state and by region. The apparent regional advantages or disadvantages resulting from population shifts, climatic differences, lower resource prices, containerization, etc., must be incorporated into studies of interregional competition and competitive advantage. Evaluation of the individual firm's adjustments and the overall structure of the industry should benefit nurserymen and consumers, as well as contribute to enhanced efficiency in the allocation of resources from a macro perspective.

PRINCIPAL S-103 PUBLICATIONS

Publications in bold represent those from most recent project period.

Abdelmagid, B.D., M.K. Wohlegnant, and C.D. Safley, "Demand Elasticities for Selected Plants Sold in Garden Centers," Selected paper presented at the Annual AAEA Meeting, Indianapolis, Indiana. Abstract American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1995.

Abdelmagid, Banaga D., Michael K. Wohlgenant, and Charles D. Safley. "Demand for Plants Sold in North Carolina Garden Centers." Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 25(1):33-50, 1996.

Adrian, J.L., C. Lokey, and R. Dickens. 1985. Turfgrass-Sod Marketing in Alabama. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Bull. No.571, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

Adrian, J.L., C. Lokey, and R. Dickens. 1986. "Sod Marketing at the Consumer Level." J. of Environmental Horticulture 4(1):15-31.

Adrian, J.L., T.E. Johnson, and B.K. Behe. 1990. "Retail Nurseries and Garden Centers Important to the Ornamentals Industry." Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Highlights of Ag. Res. 37(3):14.

Adrian, J.L., R. White, and R. Dickens. 1992. "Turfgrass-Sod Production as an Alternative Use for Resources," J. American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers 56(1):41-46.

Adrian, J.L., P. Duffy and M. Loyd. 1995. Competitive relationship of three warm-season turfgrass species. J. of Agribusiness, 13(1):1-15.

Adrian, John L. Jr, Patricia A. Duffy, and William Michael Loyd. "Turfgrass-Sod: A Viable Farm Enterpirse. Journal of Production Agriculture 9(2):173-283, 1996.

Aitken, J.B. D.R. Alverson, and A.T. Pertult, Jr. 1990. "Influence of Hydrophilic Gels on the Water Holding Capacity of Pine Bark Media." Proc. SNA Res. Conf. 35: 97-99.

Aitken, J.B. 1995. "Evaluation of Warm Season Perennial Grasses for Low Maintenance Landscapes." Proceedings of SNA Research Conference. Vol. 40:301-302.

Alverson, D.R. K.M. Hoffman, and J. B. Aitken. 1990. "Effects of Hydrophilic Gels on the Activity of Systemic Insecticides for the Control of Lacebugs on Container-Grown Azaleas." Proc. SNA Res. Conf. 35:174-176.

Ames, C. and A.E. Einert. 1987. "Characterization and Purchasing Patterns of Arkansas Retail Nurseries," Proceedings of the Arkansas State Horticultural Society 1987: 128-129. Little Rock, AR.

Ames, C. 1990. "Commercial Distribution and Procurement Patterns of Woody Landscape Ornamentals in Arkansas." University of Arkansas Department of Agricultural Economics M.S. Thesis. Fayetteville, AR.

Arnold, M.A. "Mechanical Correction and Chemical Avoidance of Circling Roots Differentially Affect Posttransplant Root Regeneration and Field Establishment of Container-grown Shumard Oak." Journal of American Society of Horticultural Science 121:258-263, 1996.

Arnold, M.A. and H.J. Lang. "Greenhouse Production and Subsequent Landscape Responses of Petunia and Pansy to Copper-coated Containers, Cell Size, and Extended Production Schedules." Submitted to Subtropical Plant Science, 1996.

Arnold, M.A., M.W. Goyne, W.C. Welch, D.C. Wilkerson, and C.R. Hall. "Container Production of Under-utilized Small Trees for Texas' Urban Landscapes: A Preliminary Update." Landscape Plant News,1996.

Arnold, M.A., M.W. Goyne, W.C. Welch, D.C. Wilkerson, and C.R. Hall. "Facilitating Container Production of Native Texas Small Trees for Urban and Suburban Landscapes." Native Plant Society of Texas News, 1996.

Arnold, M.A. "Growth Responses of Container-Grown Baldcypress to Media Drench Applications of Mineral 22 (mineral soil derivative) and Alternative Commercial Fertilizers." Southern Nurserymen's Association Research Conference 41, 1996.

Badenhop, M.B. and S-103 Technical Committee. 1979. Factors Affecting Southern Regional Production Advantages for Kurume Azaleas. Southern Cooperative Series Bulletin 241.

Badenhop, M.B. 1979. "Pfitzer Juniper Cost of Production Budget" Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants, Bulletin Y-149, TVA, NFDC, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

Badenhop, M.B. 1980. Cost of Producing and Marketing A Shade Tree: The Pin Oak. Southern Cooperative Series, Bulletin Number 244.

Badenhop, M.B. 1981. "Marketing Woody Ornamental Plants by Tennessee Nursery Wholesalers." Tennessee Farm and Home Science, Number 120, Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station, Knoxville, TN.

Badenhop, M. S. and T.D. Phillips. 1983. Costs of Producing and Marketing Woody Ornamental Landscape Plants: The Pfitzer Juniper. Southern Cooperative Series, Bulletin Number 299.

Badenhop, M.B. and T. Glasgow. 1985. "A Production System and Cost for Propagating Dogwood Cultivars from Softwood Cuttings." J. of Environ. Hort. Vol. 3, No. 2.

Badenhop, M.B., T.D. Phillips, and F.B. Perry. 1985. Costs of Establishing and Operating Field Nurseries Differentiated by Size of Firm and Species of Plant in U.S.D.A. Climatic Zones 7 and 8. Southern Cooperative Series, Bulletin Number 311.

Baqir, M. and R.L. Harkess. 1997. Zinc Uptake by Pelargonium X Hortorum Grown in Shredded Tire Rubber Amended Media. HortScience. 32:485.

Barton, S.S., J.L. Haydu, R.A Hinson, R.E. McNiel, T.D. Phillips, R. Powell, and F.E. Stegelin. 1992. Establishing and Operating a Garden Center: Requirements and Costs. Garden Centers of America, 1250 I Street,N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C.

Barton, S.S, J.R. Brooker, C.R. Hall, S.C. Turner. 1997. Review of Consumer Preference Research in the Nursery and Landscape Industry. Journal of Environmental Horticulture (accepted).

Barton, S.S., J. Mercer and C.J. Molnar. "Using Focus Groups to Determine Market Potential for Wildflower Sod." HortTechnology 6(3), 1996.

Barton, S.S., J.J. Haydu, R.A. Hinson, R.E. McNiel, T.D. Phillips, R. Powell and F.E. Stegelin. 1994. "Requirements and Costs of Establishing and Operating a Garden Center." Nursery and Landscape Program 1993 Research Report, Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Kentucky, College of Agriculture, Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, SR93-3:35-39.

Bauer, L.L. and J.R. Brooker. 1991. Characteristics of Ornamental Nursery Firms in South Carolina. Res. Rpt. 91-1, South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, Clemson University, Clemson, SC.

Behe, B.K., J.L. Adrian, and C.H. Gilliam. 1990. "Structure of Alabama's Nursery Industry." Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station. Alabama Agribusiness, 28(4):2-4, Auburn, AL.

Behe, Bridget, Robert Nelson, Susan Barton, Charles Hall, Steve Turner, and Charles Safley. 1997. "Consumer Preferences for Geranium Flower color, Leaf Variegation, and Price in Five U.S. Markets." HortSci.32:509.

Behe, B. P.Redman, and J. Dole. "Consumer Preferences for Poinsettia." Proceedings of the Southern Nurserymen's Association Research Conference, Forty-Second Annual Report. 42:383-385.

Briggs, B. and J.L. Green. 1994. "Update: Closed, Plant Production System." Combined Proceedings International Plant Propagators' Society, Vol. 44 - New Zealand Division.

Britt, C.H. and R.L. Harkess. 1997. "Shredded tire rubber as a media amendment in the production of fall chrysanthemums." Proc. Southern Nurserymen Assoc. Res. Conf. 42:28-31.

Brooker, J.R. and H.D. Bryan. 1989. "Distribution of Tennessee Woody Ornamentals by Outlet and Destination," Proceedings of the SNA Res. Conf. 34: 161-166.

Brooker, J.R. 1989. "Tennessee Nursery Marketing Channels," Proceedings of the Tennessee Nursery Short Course 22. Knoxville, TN.

Brooker, J.R., and S.C. Turner. 1990. Trade Flows and Marketing Practices Within the United States Nursery Industry. Southern Cooperative Series,Bulletin Number 358. Tenn. Agri. Exp. Sta., Knoxville.

Brooker, J.R. 1991. "Landscape Plants: Production and Marketing Trends," Proceedings of the SNA Res. Conf. 36:350-353.

Brooker, J.R., S.C. Turner, R.A. Hinson. 1995. "Trade Flows and Marketing Practices Within the United States Nursery Industry: 1993." Southern Cooperative Series.

Brooker, John R. "Industry Growth and Limiting Factors: A Comparison Among States." Paper presented as part of Free Session at AAEA Annual Conference entitled Quality Issues in the U.S. green Industry, San Antonio, Texas, July, 1996.

Brooker, John R. "Marketing Practices and Interstate Movement of Plant Material: A 24-State Analysis." Poster presentation at Southern Nurserymen's Association Research Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, August, 1996.

Brooker, John R. "Nation-Wide Growth in the Nursery Industry: Are Southern States Gaining or Losing Market Share." Proceedings of Research Conference, 40th Annual Report, Southern Nurserymen's Association Research, Atlanta, GA, pp. 314-319, 1996.

Brooker, John R. "Nurserymen's Marketing Practices." Poster Presentation, Tennessee Nurseryment Association, 20th Annual Trade Show, Nashville, TN, July, 1996.

Bryan, H.D., Jr. and J.R. Brooker. 1989. Tennessee's Ornamental Nursery Industry and Trade Flows and Marketing Practices. Dept of Ag. Econ. and Rural Soc., RR # 89-01, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN.

Burney, L. and R.L. Harkess. 1997. "Evaluation of Impatiens for Late Season Color in the Landscape." Proc. Southern Nurserymen Assoc. Res. Conf. 42:490-493.

Cisar, J. L. and J. J. Haydu. 1991. "Adjustments in Market Channels and Labor Practices in the Florida Sod Industry." J. of Agribusiness,24(2)33-40.

Coutu, A.J. and V.A. Vitelli. 1979. "Transfer Costs as They Influence Regional Competition," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants. TVA/NFDC Bulletin Y-149, Muscle Shoals, AL.

Crafton, V.W., T.D. Phillips, and T.M. Blessington. 1982. Costs of Producing Woody Ornamental Plants. Agricultural Economics Research Report 137, Mississippi Agricultural Experiment Station, Mississippi State,MS.

Crafton, V.W.and T.D. Phillips. 1984. Programming Container-Grown Woody Ornamental Crops. Agricultural Economics Research Report 155, Mississippi Agricultural Experiment Station, Mississippi State, MS.

Deller, S.C. and T.R. Harris. 1993. "Estimation of Minimum Market Thresholds for Rural Commercial Sectors Using Stochastic Frontier Estimations." Regional Science Perspectives. vol. 23, No. 1, pp.3-17.

Dickerson, H.L., M.B. Badenhop, and J.W. Day. 1983. Cost of Producing and Marketing Rooted Cuttings of Three Woody Ornamental Species in Tennessee. University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin Number 624, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN.

Doerer, D.A., R.D. Wright and L.F. Wick. 1982. "Transportation and Distribution of Woody Ornamentals in Virginia," HortScience. 17:617-618.

Eakes, D.J., C.H. Gilliam, H.G. Ponder, C.E. Evans, and M.E. Marini. 1990. "Effect of Trickle Irrigation, Nitrogen Rate, and Method of Application on Field-Grown 'Compacta' Japanese Holly." J. of Eviron. Hort. 8(2):68-70.

Eakes, D.J., R.D. Wright, and J.R. Seiler. 1991. "Moisture Stress Conditioning Effects on Salvia Splendens 'Bonfire'." J. of Amer. Hort. Sci., 116(4):716-719.

Eakes, D.J., C.H. Gilliam, H.G. Ponder, W.B. Webster, and C.E. Evans. 1991. Growth of Five Shade Trees as Influenced by Trickle Irrigation Based on Net Evaporation. Ornamentals Research Report. Series 7:20-21.

Einert, A.E. 1979. "Pfitzer Juniper Production System Alternatives," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants, Bulletin Y-149, TVA, NFDC, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

Fernandez R. T., T. Whitwell, W.B. Miller III, E.S. Gibson, and K.C. Petroskey. "Using the WWW to Provide Information to the Nursery Industry." Proceedings of the Southern Nurserymen's Association Research Conference, Forty-Second Annual Report. 42:4274-275.

Foshee, K.H., T.D. Phillips, A.J. Laiche, Jr., and S.E. Newman. 1990. Cost of Production Estimates for Container Grown Landscape Plants, Climatic Zones 7 and 8, 1990, Agricultural Economics Research Report Series,189, Mississippi Agri. and Forestry Exp. Sta., Mississippi State, MS.

Foshee, Kenneth, Travis Phillips, and Lisa Offenbach House. "Estimating the Cost of Producing Container-Grown Landscape Plants with the Assistance of Computer Accounting Software." Journal of Environmental Horticulture (accepted), 1997.

Free, W.F. and A. Vitelli, 1979. "Using Budgets for Decision Making," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants, Bulletin Y-149, TVA/ NFDC Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

Free, W.J. and V.A. Vitelli. 1980. "The Competitive Position of Alabama's Woody Ornamental Market," Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science 51(3). Birmingham, AL.

Gamble, J.C. 1979. "Budgets and Financing," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants, Bull. Y-149, TVA/NFDC, Muscle Shoals, AL.

Garber, M.P., W. G. Hudson, J.G. Norcini, R.K. Jones, A.R. Chase and K. Bondari. "Pest Management in the United States Greenhouse and Nursery Industry: I. Trends in Chemical and Nonchemical Control." HortTechnology 6(3):194-200, 1996.

Garber, M.P. and W. G. Hudson. "Pest Management in the United States Greenhouse and Nursery Industry: Introduction and Perspective." HortTechnology 6(3):194, 1996.

Garber, M.P. and K. Bondari. "Landscape Maintenance Firms: II. Pest Management Practices." Journal of Environmental Horticulture 14(2):58-61, 1996.

Garber, M.P., W. G. Hudson, J.G. Norcini, R.K. Jones, A.R. Chase and K. Bondari. "Pest Management in the United States Greenhouse and Nursery Industry: II. Disease Control." HortTechnology 6(3):200-206, 1996.

Garber, M.P., W. G. Hudson, J.G. Norcini, R.K. Jones, A.R. Chase and K. Bondari. "Pest Management in the United States Greenhouse and Nursery Industry: III. Plant Growth Regulation." HortTechnology 6(3):207-210, 1996.

Gilliam, C.H., W.J. Foster, J.L. Adrian, and R.L. Shumack. 1990. "A Survey of Weed Control Costs and Strategies in Container Production Nurseries." J. Environ. Hort., 8(3):133-135.

Gineo, W.M. 1989. "The Impact of Product Attributes on Nursery Stock Purchases," University of Connecticut Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology Staff Paper 89-1. Storrs, CT.

Gineo, W. M. and S. W. Omano. 1990. "An Analysis of Household Expenditures on Nursery products in the United States," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics. 22(2):199-208.

Goyne, Mitchell W. and Michael A. Arnold. "Container Production of Under-utilized Small Trees Under Kenaf and Coconut Coir Pith." Southern Nurserymen's Association Research Conference, 1996.

Gunter, D.L. 1979. "Use of Computers in the Nursery," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants. TVA/NFDC Bulletin Y-149. Muscle Shoals, AL.

Hall, C.R., T.D. Phillips, A.J. Laiche, and S.E. Newman. 1987. Update of Production Systems and Cost of Production Estimates for Container-Grown Landscape Plants, Climatic Zones 8 and 9. Ag. Econ. Res. Report 176, MAFES, Mississippi State, MS.

Hall, C.R., L.G. Kizer, J.V. Krans, T.D. Phillips, and G.E. Coats. 1988. An Economic and Agronomic Analysis of Mississippi Turfgrass Sod Farms, Agricultural Economics Research Report 183, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS.

Hall, C.R. and T.D. Phillips. 1989. "A Model for Determining Nursery Product Mix and Cash Flows," Proceedings of the SNA Research Conference 34. Marietta, GA.

Hall, C.R. and T.D. Phillips. 1990. "A Model to Determine Product Mix," American Nurseryman 172(1):.

Hall, C.R. and T.D. Phillips. 1990. "Programming Product Mix Monthly Cash Flows for Nursery Crops in the Southeast." J. of Econ. and Finance, Vol. 14. No. 1, Spring.

Hall, C.R. 1991. "Image Assessment for Retail Nurseries and Garden Centers," Proceedings of the SNA Research Conference 36. Marietta, GA.

Hall, Charles R. "An Image Assessment of Teas Landscape Service, Houston, Texas." Texas Agricultural Extension Service, August, 1996.

Hall, Charles R. "Image Assessment of Keith's Nursery, Waco, Texas." Texas Agricultural Extension Service, May, 1996.

Harkess, R.L. and Lyons, R.E. 1997. "A Comparison of Seed Rate, Spacing, and Weed Control Methods in the Virginia Tech Transplanted Meadow." HortTechnology.7:39-41.

Harris, Thomas R., Kalyan Chakraborty, Lijuan Xiao, and Rangesan Narayanan. "Application of Count Data Procedures to Estimate Thresholds for Rural Commercial Sectors." The Review of Regional Studies 26(1):75-88, 1996.

Haydu, John J., A.W. Hodges, P. van Blokland. "The Sod Production Sector's Contribution to Florida's Economy." Turfgrass Research in Florida, Food & Resource Economics Department, IFAS, University of Florida, 6 pp., 1996.

Haydu, John J., A.W. Hodges, P. van Blokland, and J. Cisar. "The Turfgrass Industry's Contribution to Florida's Economy." Turfgrass Research in Florida, Food & Resource Economics Department, IFAS, University of Florida, 14 pp., 1996.

Haydu, John J. and Alan W. Hodges. "Improving Labor Efficiency in Florida's Nursery Industry." Extension Notes, EN-35, Food & Resource Economics Department, Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food & Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, 1996.

Haydu, John J. and Richard J. Beeson 1997. "The Economic Feasibility of Microirrigating Container Grown Landscape Plants." Journal of Environmental Horticulture. 15 (1):23-29.

Hinson, R. A. 1983. "The Nursery Industry in Louisiana," Louisiana Rural Economist 45 (4). Baton Rouge, LA.

Hinson, R., S. Cyrus and C. Ackroyd. "A Case Example of Employee Empowerment." Proceedings of SNA Research Conference, Vol. 39, 1994.

Hinson, R. and D. Hughes. "Estimating the Value of Ornamental Plants and Turfgrass Industries in Louisiana." Proceedings of Southern Nurserymen's Association Research Conference, Volume 41, 1996.

Hinson, R. and S. Turner. "Choice of Nursery-Appropriate Marketing Channels in the Landscape Plant Industry." Journal of Environmental Horticulture, 12(2):76-79, June, 1994.

Hinson, R.A., S.C. Turner. and J.R. Brooker. 1995. Transaction methods among wholesale U.S. nurseries. Agribusiness: An International Journal 11(2):147-154.

Hinson, R., S.C. Turner and J. Brooker. 1995. "Transaction Methods Among Wholesale Nurseries." Agribusiness: An International Journal.

Hinson, R. "Destination Markets for Louisiana Woody Ornamental Plants." Louisiana

Agriculture, LAES, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Vol. 39, No. 3, 1996, p.26-27.

Hinson, R. And D. Hughes. "Nursery and Turf Crop Industry: Adding Value to Louisiana's Economy." Louisiana Agriculture, LAES, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, La. State Univ., Baton Rouge, Vol. 40, No. 2, 1997, p29-31.

Hodges, A. and J.J. Haydu. 1990. An Economic Overview of Florida's Woody Ornamental Industry. Economic Report 120. Food &amp; Resource Economics Department, IFAS, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Holt, Thomas, B.K. Maynard, and W.A. Johnson. "Rooting Rhodendendron Without Mist: Subirrigation and Medium pH." International Plant Propagator's Society, 46th annual meeting, 1996.

Hood, E.M. III J.G.Hamil, S.R. Spurlock, J.G. Thomas, and T.D. Phillips,1987. "Economic Evaluation of Alternative Sizes and Types of Center-Pivot Irrigation Systems for Nursery Production." SNA Res. Conf., 32:230-233.

Hudson, W., M. Garber, J. Norcini, R. Jones and B. Thomas. "Pest Management in the Greenhouse and Nursery." Proceedings of SNA Research Conference 41:310-311, 1996.

Hudson, J. B.K. Behe, H.G. Ponder, W.E. Barrick. 1997. Consumer Perceptions and Expectations of Garden Center Product and Service Quality. J. Env. Hort. 15:12-15.

Hymum, K. and T.D. Phillips. 1979. "Retail Nursery and Garden Center Operations in Mississippi," Agricultural Economics Marketing Research No. 81. Mississippi State, MS.

Jinkins, J. and M. Ahearn, 1991. "Net Value Added Gauges Farming's Contribution to the Economy,"Agricultural Outlook, USDA: Washington, D.C., p.26-28.

Johnson, D., 1988. "Ornamental Horticulture is Blooming," Agricultural Outlook, USDA: Washington, D.C. p.12-15.

Johnson, D.C.. 1990. Floriculture and Environmental Products: A Production and Marketing Statistical Review, 1960-88, S.B. 817, USDA/ERS.

Johnson, D., 1990. Floriculture and Environmental Horticultural Products. Statistical Bulletin 817, USDA: Washington, D.C.

Johnson, D.C. and R.L. Christensen, 1995. The Green Industry Today - Some Issues and Future Prospects. J. of Agribusiness, Vol 13(1):63-76.

Johnson, D., 1992. "Floriculture - A Growth Industry," Agricultural Outlook, USDA: Washington, D.C., p.25-27.

Johnson, D., 1991. "U.S. & World Floriculture Continues Up." Agricultural Outlook, USDA: Washington, D.C., p.32-37.

Johnson, Doyle. FLO-97, "Floriculture and Environmental Horticulture Situation and Outlook Report." U.S.D.A., Economic Research Service. October 1997.

Kizer, L., T.D. Phillips, J. Kras, and S. Suwanabatr. 1987. Financial Analysis of North Mississippi Turfgrass Sod Farms. Ag. Econ. Res. Report 174, MAFES, Mississippi State. MS.

Lard, Curtis F. and Charles R. Hall. "Results of the Landscape Contractors Survey." Texas Turfgrass Economic Impact Study, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Horticultural Economics Research Report #96-4, April, 1996.

Lard, Curtis F. and Charles R. Hall. "Results of the Wholesale Grower and Retail Garden Center Surveys." Texas Turfgrass Economic Impact Study, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Horticultural Economics Research Report #96-6, June, 1996.

Massey, P.H., Jr. 1979. "Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Ornamentals in the South," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants, Bulletin Y-149, TVA/NFDC, Muscle Shoals,Alabama.

Maynard, B.K. 1997. Rooting-out of B&B Stock: A Solution Using Copper-Treated Burlap. Yankee Nursery Quarterly. 7(1):9-11.

Maynard, B. and W.A. Johnson. 1997. Controlling Rooting-out of B&B Stock During Storage. J. Environmental Hort. 15(2):111-114. URI AES Contribution #3442.

Maynard B.K.1997 . "Using Cupric Hydroxide to Reduce the Rooting-out of B&B Stock During Storage." HortScience 32(2):455.

McNiel, R.G. 1979. "In Oak Production System Alternatives," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants, Bulletin Y-149, TVA, NFDC, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

Norcini, J.G., M.P. Garber, W.G. Hudson, R.K. Jones, A.R. Chase and K. Bondari. "Pest Management in the U.S. Greenhouse and Nursery Industry: V. Insect and Mite Control. HortTechnology 6(3):216-221, 1996.

Obst, Steven P., Charles R. Hall and Michael A. Arnold. "Economic Analysis of Arizona Ash Sequentially Produced in Copper-treated or Nontreated 0.21-, 2.5-, and 11.8- Liter Containers." Hortscience 31(4), August, 1996.

Perry, F.B. and M.B. Badenhop. 1982. Production and Marketing of Woody Ornamentals in Alabama. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station,Bulletin Number 546, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

Perry, F.B., M.S. Badenhop, and T.D. Phillips. 1987. Costs of Establishing and Operating A Small and Large Container Nursery in U.S.D.A. Climatic Zones 7 and 8. Southern Cooperative Series, Bulletin Number 327.

Perry F.B., T.D. Phillips, L.W. Wilson, and J.L. Adrian. 1990. Establishment and Operation of 20- and 40-Acre Container Nurseries in Climatic Zone 9. Southern Cooperative Series, Bulletin Number 341.

Phillips, T.D. 1979. "Development of Cost of Production Budgets for Landscape Plants in the South," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants, Bulletin Y-149, TVA, NFDC, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

Phillips, T.D. and V.A. Ward, 1980. "Programming for Optimum Crop Combinations for a Small Nursery," Proceedings of SNA Res. Conf.,25:165-167.

Phillips, T.D. and M.B. Badenhop. 1983. "South's Competitive Advantage in Producing Junipers," Proc. of the SNA Res. Conf., 28 Annual Report.

Phillips, T.D. 1984. "Regional Advantages in Producing Container-Grown Nursery Stocks," Agri. Econ. Staff Paper No. 66, MAFDS, Mississippi State, MS.

Phillips, T.D. 1984. "Alternative Methods for Pricing Landscape Maintenance Services," Agri. Economics Staff Paper No. 68. Mississippi State, MS.

Phillips, T.D. 1988. "Pricing Landscaping and Related Products and Services for Profit," Mississippi State University Agricultural Economics Staff Paper No. 82. Mississippi State, MS.

Phillips, T. D. 1989. "A Review of Economic Research in Ornamental Horticulture." Presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association, Annual Meeting, Baton Rouge, LA.

Phillips, T. D. and C.R. Hall. 1990. "Programming Product Mix Monthly Cash Flows for Nursery Crops in the Southeast," J. of Econ. and Finance. Vol. 14.

Phillips, T. D., Johnson, H. Kneen, and J. Brooker. 1990. "Market and Economic Research in Ornamental Horticulture," University of Georgia Division of Agricultural Economics Faculty Series 90-06. Athens, GA.

Phillips, T.D. 1991. "Pricing for Profit: An Introduction," Landscape Management 30(2).

Phillips, T.D. 1991. "Pricing for Profit II," Landscape Management 30(3).

Rawson, J.M. and R.L. Harkess. 1997. Pinching of Lagerstroemia for Use as a Potted Florist Crop. HortScience. 32:470.

Rawson, J.M. and R.L. Harkess. 1997. "Growth and flowering of Lagerstroemia in response to photoperiod and fertilization rates." Proc. Southern Nurserymen Assoc. Res. Conf. 42:38-43.

Redman, P.B., B.K. Behe, J.M. Dole. 1997. Consumers Prefer Red Poinsettia Cultivars. HortTech.7:438-441.

Rhodus, T. and R. Taylor. 1990. "Nursery Stock Dealer Survey. The Buckeye Nurseryman, May.

Rhodus, T. and J. Hoskins. "1995 Perennial Sales Survey." Perennial Plants, Quarterly Journal of the Perennial Plant Association, Volume 3, No. 2, Spring, 1995.

Robbins, J.A., J.L. Green, and C. Briggs. 1991. "Plant Environment Thermodynamics in Individual Containers and in a Closed, Insulated Pallet System." Hortscience 26 (6): 762.

Roberts, D.R. 1991. "A New Look at Container Growing--CIPS: A Closed, Insulated Pallet System." Nursery Manager 7 (42):50-56. Branch-Smith Publishing Co., Fort Worth, TX.

S-103 Technical Committee. 1979. "Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants" National Fertilizer Development Center, Tennessee Valley Authority, Muscle Shoals, Alabama, Bulletin Y-149 (Proceedings of July Workshop - Southern Regional Research Committee (S-103), the American Association of Nurserymen, and the Southern Nurserymen Association).

Safley, Charles D. and Michael K. Wohlgenant, Factors that Influence Consumer Selection of Garden Centers, J. of Agribusiness, Vol.13(1):33-50.

Shonkwiler, J. Scott and Thomas R. Harris. "Rural Retail Business Thresholds and Interdependencies." Journal of Regional Science 36(4):617-630, 1996.

Smith, C.N. 1979. "Krume Azalea Cost of Production Budget," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants, Bulletin Y-149,TVA,NFDC, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

Smith, C.N. and D.B. McConnell. 1979. "Effects of Changes in Prices of Selected Production Inputs on Azalea Costs Per Container," Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society 91:217-220. Winter Haven,FL.

Smith, C.N. 1980. "Kurume Azaleas, Cost of Production Budget." Nurserymen's Digest 14:12 (Dec. 1980) pp. 60-66.

Smith, Cecil N. and D. B. McConnell. 1981. "Effects of Shifts in Prices of Land, Labor, and Capital on the Cost of Producing Pfitzer Juniper," Proceedings, Florida State Horticultural Society, 94:91-93.

Stegelin, F.E. and A.J. Powell. 1991. "Scope of the Kentucky Turf Industry." AgriBusiness News for Kentucky 72, April-May 1991.

Stegelin, Forrest E. "Count Customers and Defections in Marketing Analysis." Proceedings of SNA Research Conference 41:312-312, 1996.

Stokes, Jeffrey R., James W. Mjelde, and Charles R. Hall. "Optimal Marketing of Nursery Crops from Container-based Production Systems." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, May, 1996.

Taylor, R.D., E.M. Smith, and T. Rhodus. 1989. "Selected Characteristics and Practices of Ohio Nurseries," The Buckeye Nurseryman, Issue 09/89:7, Columbus, OH.

Taylor, R.D. E.M. Smith, and H.H. Kneen, 1989. "Traveler Gun Irrigation of Field Grown Nursery Stock." Ohio Ag. Res. and Dev. Center, Spec. Circ. 123. Ornamental Plants. 1989. A Summary of Research 23-35.

Taylor, R.D., E.M. Smith, D.J. Beattie, and G.P. Pealer. 1990. Requirements and Costs of Establishing and Operating a Three-Acre Herbaceous Perennial Container Nursery. Southern Cooperative Series, Bulletin 354.

Taylor, R.D., H.H. Kneen, D.E. Hahn, and E.M. Smith. 1983. Costs of Establishing and Operating Container Nurseries Differentiated by Size of Firm and Species of Plant in U.S.D.A. Climatic Zone 6. Southern Cooperative Series, Bulletin Number 301.

Trieb, S.E. 1979. "Personnel Management in the Wholesale Nursery Industry," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants. TVA/NFDC Bulletin Y-149. Muscle Shoals, AL.

Turner, S.C. 1989. "Landscape Expenditures Analysis for Georgia Consumers." American Nurseryman, July 1, 1989:202.

Turner, S.C. and S.M. Fletcher. 1989. "An Economic Analysis of Retail Outlet Selection for Consumer Purchases of Environmental Plants," Proceedings of the SNA Res. Conf. 34:172-175.

Turner, S.C. and F.E. Stegelin. 1989. "Market and Economic Research in Ornamental Horticulture, the "New" and Fastest-Growing Agricultural Industry in the United States," Amer. Jour. of Agri. Econ. 71(5):1329(abstract).

Turner, S.C. 1990. "Computer Use in the Georgia Nursery Industry." Proceedings of the SNA Res. Conf., 35:203-207.

Turner, S.C., J.H. Dorfman, and S.M. Fletcher. 1990. "Target Markets for Retail Outlets of Landscape Plants." So. J. of Agri. Econ., (22)1:177-183.

Turner, S.C., and J.H. Dorfman. 1990. "Retail Target Markets for Landscape Plants." J. of Environ. Hort., 8(3):115-117.

Turner, S.C. and J.H. Dorfman. 1991. "Identifying Retail Target Markets," American Nurseryman 173(3): 85-86.

Turner, S.C. 1991. "The Importance of Advertising Media and Store Characteristics in Landscape Plant Purchase and Retail Outlet Selection Decisions." Proceedings of the SNA Res. Conf. 36:336-338.

Turner, S.C. and W. Kriesel. 1994. "The Green Industry's Interlinkages with Georgia's Economy." Proceedings of SNA Research Conference, Vol. 39, 1994.

Turner, S.C. 1994. "Georgia Household Purchase Patterns of Landscape Plants." Georgia Green Industry Association Newsletter. 5(2)27-30, February, 1994.

Turner, S. and Kriesel, W. 1995. The relative importance of the green industry in the U.S. agricultural economy. J. of Agribusiness, Vol 13(1):51-62.

Turner, S.C., F. Stegelin, and R.E. Cleland. 1996. "Influential Factors on Out-of-State Product Sales by U.S. Wholesale Nurseries." Proceedings of Research Conference, 40th Annual Report, Southern Nurserymen's Association Research, Atlanta, GA. pp. 330-333.

Turner, Steven C. 1997. "The Stability of Target Markets for Retail Outlets of Landscape Plants." Proceedings of the Southern Nurserymen's Association Research Conference, Forty-Second Annual Report.42:400-402.

van Blokland, P.J., J.J. Haydu and A.W. Hodges. "Measuring the Economic Contribution of Florida's Turfgrass Industry Using a Value Added Methodology." Journal of International Turfgrass Research. 8(1):1127-1133.

Vitelli, V.A. and W.J. Free. 1980. "Competitive Position of Southern Nurserymen in the Woody Ornamental Market," Proc. of the SNA Res. Conf. 25:189-198.

Walker, S. and R.L. Harkess. "Delaying Flowering Using Ethephon During New Guinea Impatiens Production." Abstract in HortScience 31(4):700, 1996.

White, R. W., J. L. Adrian, and R. Dickens. 1991. Alabama's Turfgrass-Sod Industry, Bull. 610, Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

Williams, F.W. and G.F. Musillo. 1984. "Wholesale and Retail Distribution Patterns of Georgia Woody Ornamental Nursery Stock," Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report No. 461. Athens, GA.

Wright, R.D. 1979. "Pin Oak Cost of Production Budget," Economics of Producing and Marketing Woody Landscape Plants, Bulletin Y-149,TVA, NFDC, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

SRRC REVIEW

Everett Emino, Administrative Advisor

Subject: Review of Regional Research Project S103

Dr. Emino,

Members of SRRC have reviewed the project outline for S-103, Technical and Economic Efficiencies of Producing, Marketing and Managing Environmental Plants. Two reviewers recommended acceptance without revision while others suggested some level of revision. This project remains one of the few regional projects that demonstrates good collaboration between economists and plant scientists and has a long history of accomplishment. Overall the project was well organized and clearly written. In particular, the committee did a good job of addressing the comments and suggestions of the outside reviewers.

Comments by section:

Justification

The justification clearly explains the need for regional coordination and collaboration among the institutions.

Current and Previous work

The outline does a good job of showing how the project will build upon previous work conducted by the group. There is no duplication with other regional work.

Objectives

The objectives are clear and concise. There was some concern by one reviewer that the objectives were too broad and general to be attainable during the project period.

Procedures

Details on experimental design were limited but most reviewers were not overly concerned given the broad nature of the project. Leaders were identified for each of the objectives but the project would benefit from adding additional detail on how the information will be tied together. Are any regional publications planned? State code (AK) for objective two on page 18 should be corrected.

Organization

The organization was described adequately.

Attachments

The list of participants and research specializations were included (Einert should be listed as a horticulturalist rather than an economist). Resource commitments were included as required. Although the participating states were listed for each objective, the table would benefit from including the participation by objective. The publications section would benefit from listing publications over the last project period in a separate section.

General comments

Overall, I would recommend minor revision to address the need to demonstrate how each objective will be coordinated by clearly indicating who will collect and collate the data and how the information will be handled. Any anticipated joint publications should be identified. Other suggested noted above should be addressed.

Please provide me with a revised draft of the outline with an account of how the committee addressed the comments of the SRRC reviewers. I will then forward the revised document to the executive director for signature.

G. J. Weidemann

Associate Director/Associate Dean

RESPONSE TO SRRC REVIEW

In response to the project proposal review by the Southern Regional Research Committee (SRRC), the following adjustments have been made to the project proposal:

•	Additional comments have been added to each objective to more clearly identify how the information will be tied together. Planned regional publication efforts have also been identified.

•	One reviewer noted that the objectives seemed to be too broad and general to be attainable during the project period. While the objectives have been restated slightly to provide greater detail, the writing committee would like to indicate for the record that the objectives were purposely stated in this fashion in order to facilitate as much regional interaction as possible. Given the eclectic nature of the individual research efforts that exist in the Southern Region, objectives that were narrower in scope would hinder interactive research efforts on the part of committee members. Additionally, the committee has set a precedent for excellent collaborative efforts during previous project periods in which the project proposal objectives were stated in similar fashion.

•	The state code for Arkansas under objective 2 on page 12 has been corrected.

•	Correction duly noted regarding Einert's field of study. Einert is listed as a horticulturist rather than an economist in the table on page 25.

•	The table (page 25) delineating resource commitments was modified to include the participation of each researcher by objective.

•	Publications completed during the last project period were clearly identified by bolding each citation (pp. 48-59).