Examining the social and biophysical determinants of U.S. Midwestern corn farmers’ adoption of precision agriculture

Gardezi, Maaz; Bronson, Kelly

doi:10.1007/s11119-019-09681-7

Cited by 24 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While most embraced these changes, responding to these demands reflects a mix of conditions shown to drive new technology adoption including economic necessity, social concern for community members and employees, and behavioral conformity, aligning with the practices of other farmers in the community (O’Connell and Osmond 2018; Gardezi and Bronson 2020). Still others resisted making changes, most notably because they had selected farming as occupation specifically because of its distance from many of these technologies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID Connections: Lessons from Adaptations to COVID‐19 as Strategies for Building Food System Resilience

O’Connell¹,

Gay²,

McDonald³

et al. 2021

Culture Agric Food & Envi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To identify elements of crisis response that might hold lessons for resilience beyond the current moment, we studied a central North Carolina food system during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Based on ethnographic interviews with farmers, employees and volunteers of food access organizations, and local government employees, our work found that connection, networking, innovation, and technology adoption were sources of strength and growth. Lessons: food system actors found that their social connections helped them to exchange information and resources, meet increased food needs among SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) participants and Latina/os immigrants, and combine efforts to adopt technologies and learn from new labor pools. Challenges: while navigating COVID‐19, food system actors faced challenges spanning labor, safety, information, government policies, supply shortages, weather, and unreliable information. In addition to lessons and challenges, we offer a series of future research directions that we identified in our study findings. Our study shows that small‐scale production and local food organization and government responses are important and dynamic parts of a resilient food system. Regional systems’ actors were able to pivot more quickly than large‐scale systems and presented a more flexible, locally suitable model that will likely prove adaptive beyond the pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID Connections: Lessons from Adaptations to COVID‐19 as Strategies for Building Food System Resilience

O’Connell¹,

Gay²,

McDonald³

et al. 2021

Culture Agric Food & Envi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research has demonstrated that farmers adopt PA tech slowly and often adopt discrete technologies as opposed to complete PA ‘bundles’ (Miller et al 2017 , 2019 ). The development and deployment of PA over time has occurred in a top-down fashion (Gardezi and Bronson 2019 ; Rotz et al 2019a ). Ag tech promoters are now talking about technologies that are far away from being used in the field, such as 5G networks or mesh technology.…”

Section: Results: Six Tensions In Characterizing Precision Agriculturementioning

confidence: 99%

New but for whom? Discourses of innovation in precision agriculture

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe how the set of tools, practices, and social relations known as "precision agriculture" is defined, promoted, and debated. To do so, we perform a critical discourse analysis of popular and trade press websites. Promoters of precision agriculture champion how big data analytics, automated equipment, and decision-support software will optimize yields in the face of narrow margins and public concern about farming's environmental impacts. At its core, however, the idea of farmers leveraging digital infrastructure in their operations is not new, as agronomic research in this vein has existed for over 30 years. Contemporary discourse in precision ag tends to favour emerging digital technologies themselves over their embeddedness in longstanding precision management approaches. Following several strands of science and technology studies (STS) research, we explore what rhetorical emphasis on technical innovation achieves, and argue that this discourse of novelty is a reinvention of precision agriculture in the context of the growing "smart" agricultural economy. We overview six tensions that remain unresolved in this promotional rhetoric, concerning the definitions, history, goals, adoption, uses, and impacts of precision agriculture. We then synthesize these in a discussion of the extent to which digital tools are believed to displace farmer decision-making and whether digital agriculture addresses the biophysical heterogeneity of farm landscapes or land itself has become an "experimental technology"-a way to advance the general development of artificial intelligence. This discussion ultimately helps us name a larger dilemma: that the smart agricultural economy is perhaps less about supporting land and its stewards than promising future tech and profits.

show abstract

“…Rose et al [7] assert that micro-level stakeholders such as farmers are the centre of change in the digitalisation of agriculture. Others highlight farmers' pivotal role in the adoption of digital agriculture innovations [2,31]. Despite their proactive role in innovation, the literature highlights how micro-level stakeholders are often omitted in the meso and macro level considerations.…”

Section: Hierarchical Categorisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Food retailers are the first category of industrial stakeholders with direct engagement and interest in digital agriculture and micro-level impact. Despite their potential role in supporting and promoting digital agriculture [21,31], industry experts consider these groups of stakeholders rather unimportant [18]. While the application of digital technologies, such as big data analytics, is well-discussed in agriculture, consumption and retail have lagged behind [22,44] and their impact remains limited to the micro level.…”

Section: Micro-level Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Stakeholder Inclusion in Digital Agriculture: A Framework and Application to Canada

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study provides a model that supports systematic stakeholder inclusion in agricultural technology. Building on the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) literature and attempting to add precision to the conversation around inclusion in technology design and governance, this study develops a framework for determining which stakeholder groups to engage in RRI processes. We developed the model using a specific industry case study: identifying the relevant stakeholders in the Canadian digital agriculture ecosystem. The study uses literature and news article analysis to map stakeholders in the Canadian digital agricultural sector as a test case for the model. The study proposes a systematic framework which categorises stakeholders into individuals, industrial and societal groups with both direct engagement and supportive roles in digital agriculture. These groups are then plotted against three levels of impact or power in the agri-food system: micro, meso and macro.

show abstract

Examining the social and biophysical determinants of U.S. Midwestern corn farmers’ adoption of precision agriculture

Cited by 24 publications

References 51 publications

COVID Connections: Lessons from Adaptations to COVID‐19 as Strategies for Building Food System Resilience

COVID Connections: Lessons from Adaptations to COVID‐19 as Strategies for Building Food System Resilience

New but for whom? Discourses of innovation in precision agriculture

Systematic Stakeholder Inclusion in Digital Agriculture: A Framework and Application to Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About