From Data to Decisions: Helping Crop Producers Build Their Actionable Knowledge

Evans, K. J.; Terhorst, Andrew; Kang, Byeong Ho

doi:10.1080/07352689.2017.1336047

Cited by 51 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This result indicates that the technologically experienced German farmers value the utility of apps to reduce costs associated with crop protection at the farm level. This result is in accordance with Evans et al (2017) and Rose et al (2018) who emphasize that proving the financial benefits resulting from the use of a DST is important to increase the uptake of DST.…”

Section: Motivational Factorssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…In the second part, questions regarding specific topics related to crop protection apps were included. As many authors pointed out, it is crucial to involve farmers in the development process of DST to ensure that the farmers' demands are met and that these tools are applicable (e.g., Matthews et al 2008;Janssen et al 2017;Evans et al 2017;Rose et al 2018). Therefore, the farmers were asked which of the presented topics they perceive as being useful in the form of an app to optimize their crop protection strategies.…”

Section: Survey Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, this positive relationship implies that farmers value the benefits of apps and that knowledge about apps could facilitate adoption. This is especially relevant, since it can be assumed that apps will change over time and new apps will be developed to replace existing ones (Evans et al 2017). The positive effect of knowledge on the likelihood of a positive WTP can also be used as an indicator that farmers are willing to use smartphone-based DST and change their habits, which has been identified as one of the most challenging factors (Rose et al 2016).…”

Section: Farmer and Farm Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This implies that specialized farms and diversified farms value the benefits of an app equally. Nonetheless, farms with different production portfolios, also within the group of crop producers, have diversified needs for information, which leads to a need for the availability of different kinds of DST (Evans et al 2017).…”

Section: Farmer and Farm Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While it has been acknowledged that proving the financial value of a DST is an important part of the development process (e.g., Rose et al 2018), research on the farmer's willingness to pay (WTP) for these DST does not exist. Without focusing on the potential value a DST has for a farmer, the uptake of new technology-based DST will remain low (Evans et al 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Willingness to pay for smartphone apps facilitating sustainable crop protection

Bonke

Fecke

Michels

et al. 2018

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By providing additional information and simulating results, decision support tools are one of the methods to enhance a farmer's decision-making process in order to achieve more sustainable practices. With the latest developments in smartphone technology, new possibilities to integrate decision support tools into the daily work process have been emerging and smartphone apps related to crop protection have been developed. However, little is known about the utilization of smartphones by farmers in general, and specifically with regard to crop protection. In order to gather first insights into the factors that could affect the decision of farmers to integrate smartphones and crop protection-related apps in particular, into their work process, we conducted an online survey with 174 technologically experienced German farmers in 2017. We gained insights about the current use of smartphones from the surveyed German farmers, explored which topics farmers perceive as useful in the form of an app for crop protection, and which factors influence the willingness to pay for these apps. Our results show that 93% of the respondents use smartphones for agricultural purposes. Weather forecasts, tools to identify pests, diseases and weeds, as well as related forecasts are perceived as useful by the majority of respondents. Eighty-two percent of the respondents are generally willing to pay for crop protection apps. Using a probit model, we found that the farmer's age, farm size, knowledge about specific crop protection apps, potential for cost reduction, and potential to reduce negative environmental effects have an influence on the general willingness to pay. Overall, this is the first study to explore factors influencing the willingness to pay for crop protection apps and assess which types of apps are perceived as useful by technologically experienced German farmers.

show abstract

Section: Motivational Factorssupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Survey Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Farmer and Farm Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Farmer and Farm Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Willingness to pay for smartphone apps facilitating sustainable crop protection

Bonke

Fecke

Michels

et al. 2018

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Internet of Things‐Enabled Food and Plant Sensors to Empower Sustainability

Ataei Kachouei,

Kaushik,

Ali

2023

Advanced Intelligent Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To promote sustainability, this review explores: 1) the utilization of affordable high‐performance sensors that can enhance food safety and quality, plant growth, and disease management and 2) the Internet of Things (IoT)‐supported sensors to empower farmers, stakeholders, and agro‐food industries via rapid testing and predictive analysis based on sensing generated informatics using artificial intelligence (AI). The performance of such sensors is noticeable, but this technology is still not suitable to be used in real applications owing to the lack of focus, scalability, well‐coordinated research, and regulations. To cover this gap, this review carefully and critically analyzes state‐of‐the‐art sensing technologies developed for food quality assurance (i.e., contaminants, toxins, and packaging testing) and plant growth monitoring (i.e., phenotyping, stresses, volatile organic components, nutrient levels, hormones, and pathogens) along with the possible challenges. The following has been proposed for future research: 1) promoting the optimized combination of green sensing units supported by IoT to perform testing at the location, considering the remote and urban areas as a key focus, and 2) analyzing generated informatics via AI should also be a focus for risk assessment understanding and optimizing necessary safety majors. Finally, the perspectives of IoT‐enabled sensors, along with their real‐world limitations, are discussed.

show abstract

Making an Impact: How to Design Relevant and Usable Decision Support Systems for Conservation

Rose

Despot-Belmonte

Pollard

et al. 2021

Wildlife Research Monographs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decision support systems (DSS) aim to provide evidence in a usable format for decisionmakers, thereby improving the prospects for evidence-informed conservation policy and practice. These systems are usually software-based either in computer or app-form, but may exist in other formats such as on paper. Conservation decision-makers are typically faced with complex socio-environmental landscapes, competing stakeholder interests, and irreducible uncertainty. Consequently, conservation has been the focus for numerous decision support systems, which can help users to face the challenge of making trade-offs. Despite the many systems designed for conservation, there is not an accepted framework for how to develop systems that make an impact in practice. There is much evidence, however, to suggest that many systems are failing to make an impact in practice. This chapter draws on lessons learned from conservation and related disciplines on how to design good decision support systems that are desirable to intended end users. To this end, we suggest a five-stage process for participatory user-centred design -(1) identifying the user, (2) proving system value, (3) assessing available infrastructure and focusing on ease of use, (4) adopting a good marketing plan, and (5) establishing a long-term legacya process which could be used by researchers and funders alike to ensure that systems will be used by their intended audiences. Above all, we need to change our own design behaviour to increase the relevance and usefulness of the systems we are building. Acknowledging the reality that decision support systems will be implemented in complex and potentially data-sparse environments, we also reflect on how decision support systems can help decision-makers to deal with uncertain information. This final element seeks to establish the value both of quantifying uncertainty and communicating it in accessible ways to decision makers.

show abstract

From Data to Decisions: Helping Crop Producers Build Their Actionable Knowledge

Cited by 51 publications

References 71 publications

Willingness to pay for smartphone apps facilitating sustainable crop protection

Willingness to pay for smartphone apps facilitating sustainable crop protection

Internet of Things‐Enabled Food and Plant Sensors to Empower Sustainability

Making an Impact: How to Design Relevant and Usable Decision Support Systems for Conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About