Dissemination and Adoption of Dissemination and Adoption of Precision AgriculturePrecision Agriculture

Jenn ScottJenn Scott

OverviewOverview

• Types of Technology available and in use

• Adoption Trends

• Dissemination of information

• Education of farmers and the Recommended strategies

Technology AvailableTechnology Availableand in Use and in Use (4)(4) • GPS and DGPS

• GIS• Variable Rate Sensors

and applicators• Sensors (field, soil, and

crop)• Guidance Systems• Remote Sensing

– Arial mapping/ satellite imagery

– Grid soil sampling– Soil mapping– Yield monitors

• 1998 nationwide survey of over 8,400 farmers indicated that:– 70% were not aware

of PA technologies– 2% were aware but

not adopters – <5% had adopted

some aspect of PA (6)

Stages of AdoptionStages of Adoption

• Awareness

• Interest

• Evaluation

• Trial

• Adoption

• Awareness and the formation of attitudes is influenced by ag producer’s socio-economic characteristics.

Who is using PA? Who is using PA? (3)(3)

• Corn and Soybean farmers have been the most rapid adopters of PA sensing tech.

• Use of yield monitors in 1996– 30% corn in – 25% soybeans – 10% wheat

• Use of geo-referenced soil maps By 2000 – over 10% of cotton and wheat – 17% of soybeans– >20% of corn

• Purdue found that 60% of studies done indicated a positive return for any given PA technology, 10% negative, and 30% mixed.

In The Corn Belt In The Corn Belt (2)(2)

• In 16 states, only 9% utilized some form of PA representing nearly 1/5th of the 1996 harvested acreage– 7% grid samples/maps

• Of these: 70% used sampling/mapping on 64% of their acreage.

• 60% sampling 2.5 acre grids w/ 43% every 4 yrs.

– 4% applied fertilizer or lime with VRT– 6% yield monitors during harvest– 4% used yield monitor info to develop yield maps

Composite of Average Adopting FarmerComposite of Average Adopting Farmer

• Age– 70% of adopters were under age 50 (2)

• Full-time farmers– 90% listed farming as their major occupation

(2)

• Technology Savvy– Using computerized record systems (2)

• Educated– more education would enhance the ability of

the farm operator to utilize these technologies.(1)

• Experience– older farmers are less likely to invest to due shorter

planning horizons (2)

• Land Tenure– Land ownership is widely believed to encourage

adoption of technologies. (6)

• Farm Size– Lower unit cost by spreading their fixed investment in

PA over more acres -1

• Early adopters have different attributes than late or non adapters– Non adopters are very risk adverse.

Farm CharacteristicsFarm Characteristics• Size was found to be positively associated with the

adoption of PA technology. (1)

– Due to substantial human and financial capital resources– Probability of having all acreage under PA was also greater.– Of the 9% of corn farmers using PA, they controlled 19% of

the corn acreage, indication adoption has occurred primarily on the larger farms.

• Large family farm, very large family farms, and non-family farms account for 61% of production. (8)

• Over 50% of farms sales were >$250,000 (2)

• 18% grossed <$100,000 in 1996 (2)

• How do we educate farmers about their choices and about how to use the technology?

• How do we get them to adopt PA technologies?

Barriers to Adoption Barriers to Adoption (6)(6)

• Uncertainty in returns due to adoption

• High fixed cost of investment and info acquisition

• Lack of demonstrated effects on yield• Input use and environmental performance (5)

• Lack of appropriate service centers and professionals (2)

Benefits of PABenefits of PA• Make more informed management decisions• Improve input allocations • Be more efficient• Lower production costs• Improve Crop Yield / Increase profit margin. • Reduce chemical and fertilizer costs through

more efficient application. • Reduce pollution. (5)

Dissemination of Information Dissemination of Information (10)(10)

• So far, info has been targeted towards the “early adopter” producers rather than main stream producers.

• Only recently have they targeted advisors, crop consultants and dealers.

• Oriented toward understanding concepts rather than functionality of equipment or software.

• As PA progresses, the industry will have to produce a range of info for all skill levels.

Methods of DisseminationMethods of Dissemination

• Research Publications refereed journals

• Newsletters

• Extension Bulletins

• Industry Guides

• Internet

• CD’s(10)

Teaching PATeaching PA

• Teaching PA in one talk or hour lecture is impossible

• Field Days

• Conferences and Workshops

• Internet and web-based classes

Field DaysField Days

• Allows for learning ways to practically apply technologies and management practices to individual situations.

• Provides opportunity to become acquainted with what is available

• Some hands-on access to tech: opportunity to try out field computers, DGPS equip, GPS software, guidance systems and other tech. w/o investing large amounts of money.

Field Days, cont Field Days, cont (12)(12)

• Connects growers who lack local experts in PA tech with people who can help answer questions and solve problems.

• Must be carefully planned and organized– Multiple sessions for multiple areas– Try for smaller group sessions to allow max.

learning and visibility.

Conferences and WorkshopsConferences and Workshops

• Provide the opportunity to focus on PA for one to many days

• Can provide hands on exercises• PA tech isn’t necessarily crop specific, so can

use broad based sessions• WPAC• Assiniboine CC in Manitoba• U of N- Lincoln

(9)

Internet and Web-based ClassesInternet and Web-based Classes

• NCES reports: distance ed. is a more common feature at many post-secondary institutions.

• Is popular and will be more readily available in the future

• Ag field has been among the slowest to adopt dist. ed.

• With the rapid change of info in PA, internet provides the best place for information due to the ability to revise and update material.

(11)

Problems with Internet Problems with Internet

• Majority of ag producers lack internet access

• Quality and level of service in rural areas can often be poor

• Users may not be able to take advantage of all online tools despite having “access”

• Many with internet access don’t have computers that are new enough or fast enough for many programs.

Internet Access By Region Internet Access By Region (11)(11)

1997 1999

North East 14% 33%

North Central

12% 28%

South 12% 25%

West 19% 41%

Natural Learning Process for PANatural Learning Process for PA

1. Learning and understanding the concept of spatial data management, including the importance and value of spatial data.

2. Learning the proper use of sensors makes it possible to obtain intensive sampling of quality info inexpensively.

3. Learning to use a computer and software for mapping. (GIS)

(13)

4. Using info to make improved crop production decisions through assessment of yield variation and determining potential causes.

5. Summarize and interpret data to develop site-specific management plans.

6. Strategic sampling and on-farm trials(13)

Future of PA AdoptionFuture of PA Adoption

• Motivation to adopt may come from:• Environmental regulations

– Much of the US corn is grown on or near environmentally sensitive lands which require more intensive management. (aquifers, rivers, lakes, wetlands, etc)

• Public concern of excessive use of agro chemicals

• And economic gain from reduced inputs and improved farm management efficiency

ReferencesReferences1. Frenandez-Cornejo,J., Daberkow, S. McBride, W.D. Decomposing the

size effect on the adoption of innovations. AgBioForum, 4,2: 124-136.

2. Daberkow, S., McBride, W.D. Adoption rate of Site Specific Crop Management Technologies Among US Corn Growers. Retrieved from internet on April 0, 2004 from: www.eomonline.com/modernagsite/archives/daberkow.html

3. Daberkow, S. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Padgett, M. Precision Agriculture Adoption Continues to Grow. Agricultural Outlook. November 2002.

4. Zhang, N., Wang, M., Wang, N. Precision Agriculture-a world overview. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 36,2:125-139.

5. Batte, M.T, Arholt, M.W. Precision Farming Adoption and Use in Ohio: case studies of six leading edge adopters. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 38,2 : 124-139.

6. Daberkow, S., McBride, W.D. Farm and Operator Characteristics Affecting the Awareness and Adoption of Precision Agriculture Technologies in the US. Precision Agriculture, 4, 163-177, 2003.

8. www.usda.gov/new/pubs/fbook00/factbook2000.pdf

9. Fiez, T. Providing Precision Farming Education through Conferences and Workshops. Precision Agriculture, 3, 353-358. 2002

ReferencesReferences

10. Ferguson, R. B. Educational Resources for Precision Agriculture. Precision Agriculture, 3, 359-371, 2002

11. Pocknee, S. Kvien, C. Web Based Educational Programs In Precision Agriculture. Precision Agriculture, 3, 327-340, 2002.

12. Heiniger, R.W., Havlin, J.L., Kvien, C. Knowles, T. Seeing is Believing: the Role of Field Days and Tours in Precision Agriculture Education. Precision Agriculture, 3, 309-218, 2002.

13. Kitchen, N. R., Snyder, C.J., Franzen, D.W., Wiebold, W.J. Educational Needs of Precision Agriculture. Precision Agriculture, 3, 341-351, 2002.