Where Is Site-Specific Agriculture Headed?

Precision agriculture and site-specific technologies have been around for well over a decade now. Over that time, new technologies and services have been introduced — including new types of sensors, autosteer GPS guidance systems, and soil electroconductivity mapping. At this point, GPS and the concept of variable-rate application are fairly well understood by both growers and retail dealers. The question now is where the technology and associated services will go next.

As part of the 13th Annual Precision Agriculture Survey sponsored by CropLife magazine and Purdue University’s Center for Food and Agricultural Business, retail dealers were asked what they thought Precision 2.0 would look like. They were also asked to rate several barriers to the further expansion of precision agriculture — customer issues, dealer issues, and issues with the technology (these issues were also explored in 2004). The following results are based on responses from the 275 dealers who responded to the 2008 survey.

Many dealers did see changes coming. Some focused on changes at the grower level and mentioned the need to make technology more user-friendly to support more on-farm growth in use of precision services.
   â–  Grower purchase and use of GPS technology for planting/harvesting purposes is where this area is going. (AL)
   â–  Compatibility and reliability of precision equipment continues to be a challenge. The complexity is a major drawback for many growers — they don’t want to take the time to learn. (OH)
   â–  Data interpretation. My customers have data overload. They need help to make the data they are getting usable. (KS)

Several technology changes were mentioned by responding dealers as part of the changes  needed to move precision agriculture to the next level:
   â–  More autosteering. Sprayer that recognizes weeds and applies herbicides only to the weed; seed that carries multiple traits to overcome insect and herbicide issues; multiple-use application equipment. (MN)
   â–  I see the future becoming more technical from the office’s standpoint — everything being implemented on the computer in the office before being put into the machine. (IL)
   â–  Right now the industry is doing a good job of helping the producer manage his inputs. Next step is on-the-go sensing and data pooling for analysis. (MO)
   â–  RTK sub-inch technology on everything. (IN)

The responses to the open-ended question about Precision 2.0 are summarized in Fig. 1. Increased use of variable-rate fertilizer application, often driven by increased input prices, was the most common change, mentioned by a quarter of the respondents answering this question (24%). Changes in data analysis and handling were mentioned by 23% of the dealers — often with the idea that more efficient and quicker data analysis was going to be required to get to the next level. Variable-rate seeding was seen to be an important growth area in the future (21%), followed by increased variable-rate application of chemicals (15%). The other two areas where more than 10% of the respondents mentioned changes were increases in autosteer/in-field robotics and overall growth in precision application (not specifically for fertilizer or chemicals) due to increased input costs/lower product prices (15% and 10%, respectively).

Barriers To Growth

Survey respondents were asked to rate a series of issues as to how much of a barrier they were to the growth and expansion of precision agriculture. Figures 2 through 4 show the percentage of respondents who agreed or disagreed with each customer, dealer, and technology issue listed. A similar list of issues was explored in the 2004 CropLife/Purdue Precision Survey.

Dealers were almost evenly split on whether they agreed, disagreed, or were neutral that the cost of precision services to their customers was greater than the benefits they received, and that farm income pressure limits the use of precision services (Fig. 2), with 33% of the dealers agreeing that the cost was greater than the benefits and 34% agreeing that farm income was a limiting factor. 

Though these two factors were also the top two customer barriers in 2004, the impact seems to have decreased dramatically. At that time, 72% of the dealers responding to the survey said that farm income limits the use of precision technologies and 53% said that the grower costs were greater than the benefits.

Compared to farm income and costs vs. benefits, there was less agreement about the other barriers to growth in precision technology adoption. For approximately one-quarter of the dealers, interpreting data/making decisions was believed to be too time-consuming for customers and they felt customers lack confidence in site-specific recommendations. However, 41% of the responding dealers disagreed with each statement.

Over half of the respondents did not believe that soil types limited precision profitability or that local topography limited the profitability and use of precision technologies. But, both soil types and topography seemed to be a problem for 20% of the responding dealerships. The least agreement about barriers was that all customers who benefit from using precision are already using it (61% disagreed, only 18% agreed), suggesting that there are still many growers who could benefit from precision technologies that are not currently using them.

When looking at issues that are creating barriers for dealers, almost 6 out of 10 (57%) (see Fig. 3) said that they just weren’t able to charge fees high enough to make precision services profitable. Over half agreed that the cost of the equipment limits their precision offerings (51%). Almost half said they had a challenge finding employees who could deliver precision services (49%) and almost as many (45%) agreed that the cost of employees was high enough to limit the growth of precision services. Another concern that 44% of the dealers had was that it was hard to demonstrate the value of precision technologies to growers. And, for almost 4 out of 10 of the respondents (38%), another barrier was that competitors priced precision services at unprofitable levels. For all of these issues, there were 20% to 25% of the respondents who disagreed that the issue was a barrier to expansion.

The respondents were more evenly split (approximately one-third disagreed, one-third agreed, and one-third were neutral) on the issues of it being hard to create a precision program that adds significantly more value for the grower than a traditional program, and that not many growers in their area were interested in precision agriculture services.

The most disagreement occurred with the issue that a lack of manufacturer support for precision services limits their ability to provide such services (disagreed with by 42% while only 19% agreed).

Compared to 2004, several of these issues have declined in perceived importance. In 2004, almost three-quarters of the dealers (72%) believed that the cost of equipment to the dealer was a limitation in growth of precision technology (compared to only half of the dealers in 2008). Almost two-thirds (65%) of the dealers in 2004 said that growers were just not interested in precision services — and this has dropped by almost by half to 34% in 2008. Demonstrating value to the customer was a challenge to 63% of the dealers in 2004 compared to only 44% in 2008. Opinions on most of the other issues were similar both years.

The biggest technology issue that is felt to be preventing expansion of precision agriculture is a common characteristic of technology overall. Over 6 out of 10 respondents agreed that precision equipment changes too quickly and increases the costs of offering precision services. Four out of 10 respondents (45%) said that incompatibility across precision equipment and technology was a problem. Respondents were fairly split about the complexity of the equipment with 39% who did not believe that precision equipment was too complex for employees, 33% believing that it was too complex, and the remaining 28% neutral on the issue. Overall, there was not a lot of agreement that accuracy was a problem (in either the data collection technologies or the precision application technologies).

Overall, most of the technology issues were rated about the same in 2004 and 2008. In both years, over 6 out of 10 dealers agreed that the equipment changed too quickly, one-third agreed the incompatibilities between equipment and technologies were a challenge, and just under one-third of the dealers said the equipment was too complex for their employees.

Summary

Overall, precision agriculture has become much more accepted as part of a grower’s way of farming as well as in the retail dealer’s business. The cost of the equipment, proving the value of precision technology, and farm income are no longer the barriers they were four years ago. Many dealers see more streamlined technology and data collection/analysis in the future of precision agriculture. However, hand in hand with this continues to be one of the biggest barriers — that of rapidly evolving equipment and technologies that may or may not be compatible. Most dealers feel that there are many growers who are not using precision services, but who could be. This upside is balanced against pricing pressures and the cost of investing in new equipment and technology. In this new era of crop agriculture, the Precision 2.0 story will be one worth watching closely as it unfolds. 

Leave a Reply

Precision Ag Stories

Farmobile Dashboard Heat Map
Precision AgFarmobile’s EFR Dashboard Brings Real-Time Metrics To The Coffee Table
January 1, 2017
Farmobile is one of many data start-ups that we’ve been closely observing with a sense of keen curiosity since they Read More
Mike Stern
Precision AgClimate Corp. CEO Talks Retailer Support For Digital Ag
December 1, 2016
CropLife Magazine’s sister publication, AgriBusiness Global, recently sat down with Mike Stern, CEO of The Climate Corp., following the Monsanto subsidiary’s Read More
Precision AgTrimble Debuts End-to-End FMIS Platform
November 28, 2016
October’s inaugural PrecisionAg Vision Conference left this author with many thoughts and things to ponder in the coming months. Probably Read More
AGCO AgControl system
Precision AgPrecision Ag Technology: Rate Control For The Times
November 28, 2016
It’s not surprising that the need for more economical, effective application is driving the demand for the latest rate controllers Read More
Trending Articles
AgriSync
Matt Hopkins17 Agriculture Apps That Will Help You Farm Smarter In 2017
December 9, 2016
Ag professionals are working smarter, not harder, than ever before. Smart farming technologies have enabled them to reduce costs, maximize Read More
R4023 Sprayer, John Deere
CropLife 100Ag Retail Equipment Report: The Green Party Continues
December 7, 2016
In the annual race for sales in the ag retail equipment marketplace, the color schemes for participants are a little Read More
Mike Stern
Precision AgClimate Corp. CEO Talks Retailer Support For Digital Ag
December 1, 2016
CropLife Magazine’s sister publication, AgriBusiness Global, recently sat down with Mike Stern, CEO of The Climate Corp., following the Monsanto subsidiary’s Read More
Precision AgTrimble Debuts End-to-End FMIS Platform
November 28, 2016
October’s inaugural PrecisionAg Vision Conference left this author with many thoughts and things to ponder in the coming months. Probably Read More
CHS Primeland
CropLife 100The 2016 CropLife 100 Report: Reviewing The Many Bulls And Bears Impacting This Year’s Marketplace
November 28, 2016
For virtually all of 2016, the nation was wholly focused on the big Presidential election. Some folks aligned themselves with Read More
Monsanto sign
Crop InputsMissouri Governor Meets With Bayer CEO To Discuss Monsanto Merger
November 21, 2016
Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon visited Bayer AG global headquarters in Leverkusen, Germany, on November 18 to discuss the proposed Bayer-Monsanto Read More
Latest News
Eric SfiligojNo Alternative Facts: Dicamba Cropping System Applicato…
January 23, 2017
During President Donald Trump’s inauguration, much fuss was made over the use of the term “alternative facts” vs. some of Read More
Young Corn Plants
ManagementTimac Agro USA Acquires Michigan Ag Retailer
January 20, 2017
Timac Agro USA, an agriculture supply company specializing in high-efficiency plant and animal nutrition products, has acquired St. Louis,MI-based A&E Ag, Read More
Soybean field
Crop InputsNufarm Teams Up With John Deere Financial
January 19, 2017
Nufarm and John Deere Financial have teamed up to help farmers grow a better tomorrow. This program helps make purchases Read More
Sonny Perdue
LegislationTrump Formally Picks Perdue As Agriculture Secretary
January 19, 2017
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump officially announced Sonny Perdue as his choice for secretary of agriculture on Thursday, selecting a former Read More
ManagementPresident Trump, Wisconsin Review, and a Dow-DuPont Upd…
January 18, 2017
Editors Paul Schrimpf and Eric Sfiligoj reflect on a new administration, a recent winter show, and crop protection company mergers. Read More
Industry NewsBayer, MS Technologies Get China Approval For Balance G…
January 18, 2017
MS Technologies and Bayer have received import approval from China for Balance GT soybeans. The new Balance GT Soybean Performance Read More
Werner Baumann, Bayer AG, and Hugh Grant, Monsanto
Industry NewsReport: Monsanto, Bayer CEOs Among Latest to Make Trump…
January 18, 2017
The chief executive officers of German chemical giant Bayer AG and U.S. seed behemoth Monsanto, Werner Baumann and Hugh Grant, Read More
Giant Ragweed
HerbicidesStudy: Focusing On Weed Seedbank Can Help Manage Herbic…
January 18, 2017
Researchers writing in the latest issue of the journal Weed Science provide important insights on the control of herbicide-resistant giant Read More
Management3 Financial Trends To Watch In Agriculture
January 17, 2017
I recently had the opportunity to attend a meeting of credit managers for Midwest ag supply and input companies, in part Read More
Andersons Retail Store
CropLife 100The Andersons To Close All Retail Stores; Shutdown Does…
January 16, 2017
In a stunning announcement to the Toledo area, The Andersons Inc. said on Sunday that it would close its two Read More
Trimble TMX-2050 In-Cab Display
Eric SfiligojPrecision To Lead Agriculture In 2017?
January 16, 2017
Another new year is upon us! And I’m certain I speak for many in the agricultural world when I say Read More
Corn
Eric SfiligojThe Mood From Madison? In A Holding Pattern
January 16, 2017
Last week, I had the chance to attend the annual Wisconsin AgriBusiness Classic show in Madison, WI. It’s been a Read More
Syngenta Sign
Crop InputsAccenture Helps Syngenta Transform Its Global Logistics
January 13, 2017
Syngenta, a leading agriculture company, has collaborated with Accenture to design and implement a new digital logistics operating model across Read More
Fall Creek Seth Harden The Nature Conservancy
StewardshipLocal Farmers’ Watershed Initiative: Continuous Improve…
January 13, 2017
The goal in the Big Pine Watershed Project is to more intentionally do what local farmers and responsible ag retailers Read More
HerbicidesEPA Expands Enlist Duo Herbicide Registration To 34 Sta…
January 13, 2017
The U.S. EPA has expanded the geography for application of Enlist Duo herbicide from 15 to 34 states. This means Read More
Olson Ag Enterprise
CropLife 100Wilbur-Ellis Acquires Nebraska Seed Retailer
January 13, 2017
Wilbur-Ellis’ Agribusiness, a recognized leader in precision agriculture technology and the distribution and marketing of plant protection, seed and nutritional Read More
ManagementDeere-Precision Planting Update and the Ag Secretary Wa…
January 12, 2017
Editors Paul Schrimpf and Eric Sfiligoj provide the latest on the court date for John Deere/Precision Planting and the quest Read More
Monsanto sign
Seed/BiotechMonsanto, NRGene Form Agreement For Big Data Genomic An…
January 12, 2017
Monsanto Co. and NRGene have announced that the companies have reached a non-exclusive, multi-year global licensing agreement on NRGene’s genome-analysis Read More