1. PRECISION FARMING: ADOPTION, PROFITABILITY, AND MAKING BETTER USE OF DATA T.W. Griffin, J. Lowenberg-DeBoer, D.M. Lambert, and J. Peone Site Specific Management Center - Purdue University T. Payne and S.G. Daberkow USDA-ERS

2. 3 part presentation 1) Adoption trends in the US and Worldwide 2) Review of PA profitability literature 3) Making better use of yield monitor data

3. Adoption Trends Worldwide network of collaborators USDA ARMS study PA Services Dealership Survey –Whipker and Akridge, 2004

4. Combine Yield Monitors

5. Yield Monitor Grain Flow Sensor

7. Yield Map Higher yields Lower yields

8. Actual Adoption Rates of U.S. Yield Monitors Approximately 30,000 in 2000 45,000 in 2003 Source: before 1995 Mangold After 1995 USDA ARMS

9. Actual Adoption Rates of U.S. Yield Mapping Yield Monitor plus a GPS Source: USDA ARMS

10. European Yield Monitor Use Germany 4250 2122003 United Kingdom 400 432000 Denmark 4001002000 Sweden 150 482000 France 50 22000 Holland 6 112000 Belgium 6 72000 Spain 5 02003 Portugal 4 32003 Per million acresTotalYear

11. Latin American Yield Monitor Use Argentina 1000 17 2003 Brazil 100 1 2002 Chile 12 8 2000 Uruguay 4 3 2000 TotalPer million acresYear

12. Yield monitors by country per million acres

13. Soil Mapping Adoption Source: USDA ARMS

14. Remote Sensing Adoption Source: USDA ARMS Redefined question in 2002

15. Adoption of VRT-Fertilizer Source: USDA ARMS

16. Adoption of VRT in Corn Source: USDA ARMS

17. Adoption of VRT in Soybean Source: USDA ARMS

18. Adoption of VRT in Cotton Source: USDA ARMS

19. VRT Offered by Ag Retailers 67% of service providers offer VRT 40% offer single-nutrient VRT –Still less than 50% by 2006 23% offer multi-nutrient VRT in 2004 –28% of providers expect to offer by 2006 <10% offer VRT - seeding Source: Whipker and Akridge, 2004

20. Service Providers Offering VRT fertilizer, lime, and pesticides Source: Whipker and Akridge

21. VRT-Fertilizer by Region Source: Whipker and Akridge, 2004

22. GPS Lightbars Purdue Davis Farm

24. GPS Lightbar Guidance used by Service Providers 61% offer applications with GPS guidance –72% in Midwest –39% in other states Source: Whipker and Akridge, 2004

25. GPS Auto-Guidance 5.3% of dealers use GPS auto-guidance –4.2% in Midwest and 7.4% in other states –Regional difference? Source: Whipker and Akridge, 2004

26. On-the-go Sensors Soil Dr – been around the longest Greenseeker Norsk Hydro N-sensor –~320 total units –~300 in Europe

27. Sensors for Mapping Soil pH sensor available –Veris Mobile Sensor Platform >5 sold –K sensor being developed –7.8% of dealers offer soil EC mapping* *Source: Whipker and Akridge, 2004

28. Fundamental Constraints of Adoption Lack of research support Human capital costs Lack of education and training

29. Fundamental Constraints of Adoption Lack of support and consulting High opportunity cost of management time Information-intensive / embodied knowledge

30. “Information-intensive” vs. “Embodied knowledge” Information-intensive Field level data to make decisions Requires additional data and skill VRT and precision agriculture IPM Embodied knowledge Information purchased in the form of an input Requires minimal additional data/skill Hybrid corn Round-up Ready or Bt

31. Fundamental Incentives of Adoption Technology costs are declining Incorporation of technology in society –GPS in cars and boats Increased comfort level with technology –USDA FSA and NRCS using GIS with farmers

32. Fundamental Incentives of Adoption Automating Record Keeping Identity tracking of commodities Pesticide record keeping Environmental regulations – monitor input use –May lead into cost sharing for adoption

33. Fundamental Incentives of Adoption Auto-guidance systems Increase farm size with same equipment set –Reduce overlap, expand work day, increase speed Match equipment operations (6, 8, 12 row) Controlled trafficking Strip till

34. Economies of Scale in Data Analysis Skill to analyze 2000 ac works for 20,000 ac Potential for PA consulting - outsourcing Complementary goods and services

35. Part 2: PA Profitability Review Standalone VRT fertilizer often does not cover costs –Swinton and Lowenberg-DeBoer (1998) In 2000, 63% of studies showed profits, but budget methods not standardized –Lambert and Lowenberg-DeBoer (2000) Economics of precision agriculture are site-specific

36. Profitability Studies to Date Reviewed 234 articles 210 reported some kind of benefit or loss Of those, 68% reported positive benefits 52% of studies involved an economist

37. Articles by Technology

38. Articles by Crop

39. Part 3: Better Use of Data Many farmers collecting data –10 + years and several megabytes Question remains: what to do with the data? No one has all the answers Is data valuable enough to justify processing?

40. Better Use of Data Better farm-level experimental designs Spatial statistical methods More reliable local information

41. Better Experimental Designs Small plot designs developed 70 years ago –Blocking and replications neutralize variability Precision agriculture measures variability Spatial statistics can model variability

42. Better Experimental Designs Opportunity for fewer replication large blocks Types of comparisons farmer tend to conduct Experimental designs being tested in 4 states Farmer feedback crucial to evaluation

43. 64 acre field Satellite image taken in July Red outline is field boundary

44. Planned comparison design 3 varieties Single-block non-replicated Note: soil types are outlined in blue Each variety is represented on each major soil type/zone

45. Once designs are decided upon in off-season, implementation is simple at planting time Treatments can be changed at normal planter refilling times Soybean harvest can be conducted at any angle to planter pass

46. Yield Monitor Data Analysis Yield monitor data analysis service pilot project 37 th Annual Top Farmer Crop Workshop –July 18-21, 2004 More reliable results gained http://www.agecon.purdue.edu/topfarmer

47. Summary Adoption has been slow and uneven Economics well documented – many studies Information-intensive vs. embodied knowledge ag Need for analysis services to overcome constraints

48. Role of Extension Farm Management Third party evaluation desperately needed –Firm understanding of precision technologies Help farmers develop own recommendations instead of supplying answer –On-farm comparisons

49. Role of Extension Farm Management Assist farmers and ag businesses in understanding economics of information Barriers to adoption are an opportunity for extension to be more relevant

50. Terry Griffin twgriffi@purdue.edu 765.494.4257 Site-Specific Management Center Purdue University http://www.purdue.edu/ssmc