Economic Case for Precision Agricuture Apply to Ireland - Term Paper Example

Economic case for Precision agriculture apply to Ireland Introduction Agricultural activities in Ireland consist largely of the grazing of cattle andsheep. The moderate, moist climate favours the growing of grass and hay. About 68 percent of the agricultural land of Ireland consists of permanent pasture. Farmers grow mostly grains on the 14 percent of the land that can be farmed. Barley, wheat, potatoes, and sugar beets are the main crops. Barley is the principal crop in terms of acreage. The country was once heavily dependent on the potato crop, but Irish farmers have increased their plantings of other crops, and potato production has declined. Tobacco is also grown in limited areas. Irish agriculture mainly comprises of the small family farm. About 67 percent of the farms cover less than 50 acres (20 hectares), and another 25 percent are smaller than 20 acres (8 hectares). The number of people employed in agriculture continues to decrease as mechanization increases and young men and women find better-paying occupations in the cities. The number of agricultural workers in Ireland declined by about 50 percent between the years 1960 and 1991 (Britannica Student Encyclopedia, 2006). The future of Irish agriculture greatly depends on sustainable practices and proper economic planning. Precision agriculture is one of the best ways to increase the farm production. Precision Agriculture is a now a term used throughout agricultural systems worldwide. Precision agriculture can be defined as a comprehensive system designed to optimize agricultural production through the application of crop information, advanced technology and management practices. Precision agriculture begins with crop planning and includes tillage, planting, chemical applications, harvesting, and post harvest processing of the crop (Roberson, 2004). Precision farming utilizes three technologies: Global Positioning Systems (GPS), Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and Variable Rate Technology (VRT). GPS provides navigation that can position a tractor within a few feet anywhere in a field. GIS computer systems capture, manage, and analyze spatial data relating crop productivity and field inputs. VRT provides "on-the-fly" estimation of field inputs. Working in concert, GIS, GPS, and VRT provide information that allows producers to apply inputs, such as fertilizers and insecticides, precisely in a sustainable manner (Ball and Peterson 2001). Further the collected information may be used to more precisely evaluate optimum sowing density, estimate specifically fertilizers and other inputs needs, and to more accurately predict crop yields. It seeks to avoid applying same practices to a crop, regardless of local soil/climate conditions and may help to better assess local situations of disease or lodging (Wikipedia, 2006). Economic case for precision agriculture To be successful, comprehensive precision agriculture relies on three key elements: Information, Technology and Management. Precision farming may be used to improve a field or a farm management from several perspectives: agronomical perspective : adjustment of cultural practices to take into account the real needs of the crop (e.g., better fertilization management) technical perspective : better time management at the farm level environmental perspective : reduction of agricultural impacts (better estimation of crop nitrogen needs implying limitation of nitrogen run-off) economical perspective : increase of the output and/or reduction of the input, increase of efficiency (e.g., lower cost of nitrogen fertilization practice) (Wikipedia, 2006). Precision agriculture from an economic point of view refers to cropping systems which are applied across (natural or administrative) borders (Doluschitz, 2002; Doluschitz und Spilke, 2002). Varying soil conditions, yield potentials and other similarities or dissimilarities could be the relevant parameters to define such borders. From a technical point of view, generally two approaches are applied, (i) the Sensor approach (realtime) and (ii) the Mapping approach (discontinuous data management and position finding) (Doluschitz und Spilke, 2002). Most farmers will adopt the new technology only if it is expected to be a profitable investment. While the costs associated with various types of precision technology are not difficult to calculate, the benefits are. For instance, measurement of the potential productivity gains associated with variable-rate application technologies requires knowledge of underlying agronomic conditions, such as the distribution of soil characteristics across a field, and the way in which changes in input use affect productivity (Ball and Peterson 2001). Literature review There are a number of studies that have attempted to measure the benefits from the use of precision technology in agriculture. Many agronomists have recognized that there are agronomic benefits associated with precision farming, some of which extend beyond the benefits from increased productivity. Schnitkey, Hopkins, and Tweeten (1996) state that precision farming is "economically attractive when a fields soil characteristics vary so that varying input rates across a field based on soil characteristics results in more efficient input use." Swinton and Ahmad (1996) found that while many groups within the agribusiness sector have an intense interest in precision technologies, those experienced with these technologies found a number of unexpected costs, as well as a few unexpected benefits associated with adoption of precision agriculture equipment and services. They conclude that evaluating the returns to investment in site-specific crop management requires more information than the yield and cash cost data that are typically available. Lowenberg-DeBoer and Boehlje (1995) found that out of 11 case studies of operations that adopted precision technology, only two showed conclusive evidence of increased profitability. Factors contributing to profitability were high initial soil fertility and higher valued crops. They conclude that, “The available economic analysis cannot dispel the possibility that precision farming is a technological dead-end.” Most studies conclude that the economics of precision agriculture depend on the system being evaluated and the farm or operation for which the precision agriculture system is being evaluated. In other words, some precision agriculture system will be economical on some farms, but by no means will all precision agriculture systems be economical on all farmers. The following are the findings of some of the studies conducted particularly to study the profitability of Precision Farming. Swinton and Lowenberg-DeBoer (1998) compared profitability estimates for variable rate application of fertilizers in nine studies. These studies represented profit comparisons for 54 sites. Information (soil sampling) costs were added for those studies that did not recognize this charge. They reported that 57 percent of the sites studied produced greater profits for the SSM regime than for a uniform rate technology (URT). Babcock and Pautsch (1998) evaluated the profitability of VRT nitrogen fertilization relative to a uniform rate application in 12 randomly selected Iowa counties. They concluded that the economic and environmental impacts of moving from URT to VRT depended heavily on the inherent yield variability in fields. They found modest increases in returns above fertilizer costs. The majority of this benefit was for a reduction in fertilizer costs rather than an increase in yields. They suggest that reduced nitrogen usage will correspond to a reduction in nitrate leaching and associated external costs. Watkins, et al. (1998) performed a similar analysis of farm and environmental economics of VRT application of nitrogen fertilizers in seed potato production in Idaho. VRT fertilizer applications resulted in decreased profits relative to conventional fertilizer application strategies. They estimated that nitrate losses from the field were virtually the same for VRT and URT application methods. Oriade, et al. (1996) studied weed control with post-emergence herbicides. They evaluated two application techniques -- uniform rate application of the herbicides over the full field and uniform rate application of herbicides for selected portions of the field (spot spraying). They also considered alternative levels of weed populations and weed patchiness. Weed patchiness was the most important factor influencing the profitability of SSM of herbicides. They also considered the environmental consequences of the two management methods. Environmental benefits of site-specific management (SSM) increased with increased weed populations and increased patchiness of the weeds. Conclusion The greatest technology push has been in precision agriculture where sensing, information technologies, and mechanical systems enable crop management. The techniques of precision farming can complement sustainable land management in Ireland. The goal of sustainable development is to avoid negative changes in natural resources and increase the quality of life of producers. Precise, detailed information on discrete sites within a field can lead to, more efficient and economical use of inputs such as fertilizers and insecticides. Sustainable use of water resources is also another economic benefit. Finally it can be said that precision farming can be used to provide good stewardship of the land for future generations in Ireland, preserve the lands potential for multiple uses, and evaluate both off- and on-site effects of agricultural practices. References Babcock, Bruce A. and Gregory R. Pautsch. (1998). Moving from Uniform to Variable Fertilizer Rates on Iowa Corn: Effects on Rates and Returns. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol 23(2):385-400. Ball, S.T. and Peterson, J.L. (2001) Precision Farming in New Mexico: Enhancing the Economic Health of Agriculture [Online] New Mexico State University, Available from: [Accessed 9 November, 2006] Britannica Student Encyclopedia (2006) Ireland. [Online] Encyclopedia Britannica Online, Available from: [Accessed 10 November, 2006] Doluschitz, R. (2002): Rechnet sich Precision Farming (Streiflicht). Landtechnik 57 (6). Doluschitz, R. und J. Spilke (2002): Agrarinformatik. Ulmer Verlag Stuttgart. Lowenberg-DeBoer, J., and M. Boehlje, (1996) Revolution, Evolution, or Dead-end: Economic Perspectives on Precision Agriculture, In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Precision Agriculture, P.C. Robert, R. H. Rust, and W. E. Larson, eds.,(Minneapolis, MN: Sponsored by ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, June 1996, 923-44). Oriade, Caleb A., Robert P. King, Frank Forcella, and Jeffreu :. Gunsolus. (1996). A Bioeconomic Analysis of Site-Specific Management for Weed Control. Review of Agricultural Economics 18:523-535. Roberson, G.T. (2004) Precision Agriculture:  A Comprehensive Approach [Online] North Carolina State University, Available from: [Accessed 10 November, 2006] Schnitkey, Gary D., J. W. Hopkins, and Luther G. Tweeten, (1996) An Economic Evaluation of Precision Fertilizer Application on Corn-Soybean Fields, In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Precision Agriculture, P.C. Robert, R. H. Rust, and W. E. Larson, eds., (Minneapolis, MN: Sponsored by ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, June 1996). Swinton, Scott M., and M. Ahmad, (1996) Returns to Farmer Investments in Precision Agriculture Equipment and Services, Staff Paper 96-38, Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, June, 1996. Swinton, S.M., and J. Lowenberg-DeBoer. (1998). Evaluating the Profitability of Site-Specific Farming. Journal of Production Agriculture, Vol. 11(4):439-446. Watkins, K. Bradley, Yao-chi Lu, and Wen-yuan Huang. (1998). Economics and Environmental Feasibility of Variable Rate Nitrogen Fertilizer Application with Carry-Over Effects. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol 23(2):401-426. Wikipedia, (2006) Precision agriculture [Online] Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Available from: [Accessed 9 November, 2006] Read More