IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v149y2016icp165-174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision support tools for agriculture: Towards effective design and delivery

Author

Listed:
  • Rose, David C.
  • Sutherland, William J.
  • Parker, Caroline
  • Lobley, Matt
  • Winter, Michael
  • Morris, Carol
  • Twining, Susan
  • Ffoulkes, Charles
  • Amano, Tatsuya
  • Dicks, Lynn V.

Abstract

Decision support tools, usually considered to be software-based, may be an important part of the quest for evidence-based decision-making in agriculture to improve productivity and environmental outputs. These tools can lead users through clear steps and suggest optimal decision paths or may act more as information sources to improve the evidence base for decisions. Yet, despite their availability in a wide range of formats, studies in several countries have shown uptake to be disappointingly low. This paper uses a mixed methods approach to investigate the factors affecting the uptake and use of decision support tools by farmers and advisers in the UK. Through a combination of qualitative interviews and quantitative surveys, we found that fifteen factors are influential in convincing farmers and advisers to use decision support tools, which include usability, cost-effectiveness, performance, relevance to user, and compatibility with compliance demands. This study finds a plethora of agricultural decision support tools in operation in the UK, yet, like other studies, shows that their uptake is low. A better understanding of the fifteen factors identified should lead to more effective design and delivery of tools in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Rose, David C. & Sutherland, William J. & Parker, Caroline & Lobley, Matt & Winter, Michael & Morris, Carol & Twining, Susan & Ffoulkes, Charles & Amano, Tatsuya & Dicks, Lynn V., 2016. "Decision support tools for agriculture: Towards effective design and delivery," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 165-174.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:149:y:2016:i:c:p:165-174
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2016.09.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X16305418
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.09.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hochman, Z. & Carberry, P.S., 2011. "Emerging consensus on desirable characteristics of tools to support farmers' management of climate risk in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(6), pages 441-450, July.
    2. Kuehne, Geoff & Llewellyn, Rick S. & Pannell, David J. & Wilkinson, Roger & Dolling, P. & Ewing, Michael A., 2011. "ADOPT: a tool for predicting adoption of agricultural innovations," 2011 Conference (55th), February 8-11, 2011, Melbourne, Australia 100570, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    4. Julie Ingram, 2008. "Agronomist–farmer knowledge encounters: an analysis of knowledge exchange in the context of best management practices in England," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(3), pages 405-418, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lundström, Christina & Lindblom, Jessica, 2018. "Considering farmers' situated knowledge of using agricultural decision support systems (AgriDSS) to Foster farming practices: The case of CropSAT," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 9-20.
    2. Kragt, Marit Ellen & Llewellyn, Rick S., 2013. "Using choice experiments to improve the design of weed decision support tools," Working Papers 147031, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    3. Charlotte Lybaert & Lies Debruyne & Eva Kyndt & Fleur Marchand, 2021. "Competencies for Agricultural Advisors in Innovation Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Mompremier, R. & Her, Y. & Hoogenboom, G. & Migliaccio, K. & Muñoz-Carpena, R. & Brym, Z. & Colbert, R.W. & Jeune, W., 2021. "Modeling the response of dry bean yield to irrigation water availability controlled by watershed hydrology," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    5. Gary Bentrup & Michael G. Dosskey, 2022. "Tree Advisor: A Novel Woody Plant Selection Tool to Support Multifunctional Objectives," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, March.
    6. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Locating agricultural decision support systems in the troubled past and socio-technical complexity of `models for management'," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 11-25, October.
    7. So Pyay Thar & Thiagarajah Ramilan & Robert J. Farquharson & Deli Chen, 2021. "Identifying Potential for Decision Support Tools through Farm Systems Typology Analysis Coupled with Participatory Research: A Case for Smallholder Farmers in Myanmar," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, June.
    8. Gaydon, D.S. & Meinke, H. & Rodriguez, D. & McGrath, D.J., 2012. "Comparing water options for irrigation farmers using Modern Portfolio Theory," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 1-9.
    9. Dario Schulz & Jan Börner, 2023. "Innovation context and technology traits explain heterogeneity across studies of agricultural technology adoption: A meta‐analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 570-590, June.
    10. Lutengano Mwinuka & Khamaldin Daud Mutabazi & Frieder Graef & Stefan Sieber & Jeremia Makindara & Anthony Kimaro & Götz Uckert, 2017. "Simulated willingness of farmers to adopt fertilizer micro-dosing and rainwater harvesting technologies in semi-arid and sub-humid farming systems in Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(6), pages 1237-1253, December.
    11. Muhammad Ismail Kumbhar & Zareen Khan Rind & Faisal Khan Chang & Nadia Baloch & Summaya Baloch, 2019. "Effect of Climate Change on the Livelihood of Coastal Areas of Taluka Sonmaini, District Lasbela, Balochistan," International Journal of Environmental Sciences & Natural Resources, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 21-29, August.
    12. Berrueta, Cecilia & Giménez, Gustavo & Dogliotti, Santiago, 2021. "Scaling up from crop to farm level: Co-innovation framework to improve vegetable farm systems sustainability," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    13. Sarah Schomers & Bettina Matzdorf & Claas Meyer & Claudia Sattler, 2015. "How Local Intermediaries Improve the Effectiveness of Public Payment for Ecosystem Services Programs: The Role of Networks and Agri-Environmental Assistance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-31, October.
    14. Rossing, Walter A.H. & Albicette, Maria Marta & Aguerre, Veronica & Leoni, Carolina & Ruggia, Andrea & Dogliotti, Santiago, 2021. "Crafting actionable knowledge on ecological intensification: Lessons from co-innovation approaches in Uruguay and Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    15. Martin, G. & Duru, M. & Schellberg, J. & Ewert, F., 2012. "Simulations of plant productivity are affected by modelling approaches of farm management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 25-34.
    16. Le Gal, P.-Y. & Dugué, P. & Faure, G. & Novak, S., 2011. "How does research address the design of innovative agricultural production systems at the farm level? A review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(9), pages 714-728.
    17. Vayssières, Jonathan & Bocquier, François & Lecomte, Philippe, 2009. "GAMEDE: A global activity model for evaluating the sustainability of dairy enterprises. Part II - Interactive simulation of various management strategies with diverse stakeholders," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 139-151, July.
    18. Sterk, B. & van Ittersum, M.K. & Leeuwis, C. & Rossing, W.A.H. & van Keulen, H. & van de Ven, G.W.J., 2006. "Finding niches for whole-farm design models - contradictio in terminis?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 211-228, February.
    19. David Meek & Katharine Bradley & Bruce Ferguson & Lesli Hoey & Helda Morales & Peter Rosset & Rebecca Tarlau, 2019. "Food sovereignty education across the Americas: multiple origins, converging movements," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(3), pages 611-626, September.
    20. Norman Siebrecht, 2020. "Sustainable Agriculture and Its Implementation Gap—Overcoming Obstacles to Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-27, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:149:y:2016:i:c:p:165-174. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.