Small spatial differences in field conditions can strongly influence plant growth and create difficulties in terms of defining optimal crop management practices. Precision agriculture (PA) is considered to offer an optimal solution since it can adapt cultivation measures to small-scale in-field heterogeneity. Furthermore, it can potentially create environmental benefits through more efficient use of inputs. Since research on decision support is lacking with regard to the economic consequences of PA implementation, the authors use this heterogeneity as an indicator for an assessment of the benefits of PA. A new approach for using a site-specific heterogeneity indicator (HEI) that is linked to economics is presented. The HEI is defined as the coefficient of variation in annual field yield. Based on a study in East Germany between 2005 and 2007, an HEI threshold value of 17% for profitable PA was identified based on individual and external benefits. Grounded in more detailed data, the HEI could serve as a useful decision-support tool for farmers in deciding whether or not to implement PA.
BegiebingS.SchneiderM.BachH.WagnerP. (2007), ‘Assessment of in-field heterogeneity for determination of the economic potential of precision farming’Precision Agriculture '07, Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, pp 811–818.
2.
BoessJ.LöselG.BeuneI. (2002), ‘Möglichkeit und Grenzen der Nutzung der Bodenschätzung für die teilflächenspezifische Bewirtschaftung’ [Prospects and constraints of land taxation for site-specific farming], Mitteilungen Deutsche Bodenkundliche Gesellschaft, Vol 99, pp 97–98.
3.
de OliveiraR.WhelanB. (2008), ‘An index for evaluation crop production variability from remote and proximal sensor data’14th Australian Society of Agronomy Conference, ASA 2008, The Regional Institute Ltd, Gosford, Australia.
4.
Geo-konzept GmbH (2006), Gut Wittenfeld, 85111 Adelschlag, Germany, website: www.geo-konzept.de/.
5.
HerbstR.LampJ. (1998), ‘Zur kleinräumigen Heterogenität der Böden Deutschlands und zum Akzeptanzpotenzial der Teilflächenbewirtschaftung’ [Small-scale heterogeneity of soils in Germany and the potential of acceptance of site-specific crop management], Erfassung der kleinräumigen Heterogenität [Acquisition of Small-Scale Heterogeneity], KTBL-Schriften, Landwirtschaftsverlag GmbH, Münster-Hiltrup Darmstadt, pp 33–41.
6.
JürschikP. (2005), Personal correspondence within Pre Agro II project, company: Agrocom, website: juerschik@agrocom.com.
LampJ.CapelleA.EhlertD.JürschikP.KloepferF.NordmeyerH.S.D.WernerA. (1998), ‘Erfassung der kleinräumigen Heterogenität in der teilflächenspezifischen Pflanzenproduktion’ [Acquisistion of small-scale heterogeneity in site-specific crop protection], Erfassung der kleinräumigen Heterogenität [Acquisition of Small-Scale Heterogeneity], KTBL-Schriften, Landwirtschaftsverlag GmbH, Münster-Hiltrup Darmstadt, pp 7–32.
9.
LoomisJ.B.RosenbergerR.S. (2006), ‘Reducing barriers in future benefit transfers: Needed improvements in primary study design and reporting’, Ecological Economics, Vol 60, No 2, pp 343–350.
10.
LudowicyC.SchwaibergerR.LeitholdP. (2002), Precision Farming: Handbuch für die Praxis [Precision Agriculture: Handbook for Practice], DLG-Verlags-GmbH, Frankfurt am Main.
11.
MüllerCh. (2002), Charakterisierung von Standortheterogenität kleinflächiger Ackerstillegungsareale zur Ableitung biotischer Potentiale [Characterization of the Heterogeneity of Small Field Set Aside for a Deviation of Biotic Potentials], Universität Potsdam, Potsdam.
12.
PrettyJ.N.BrettC.GeeD.HineR.E.MasonC.F.MorisonJ.I.L.RavenH.RaymentM.D.van der BijlG. (2000), ‘An assessment of the total external cost of UK agriculture’, Agricultural Systems, Vol 65, pp 113–136.
13.
PrettyJ.N.BrettC.GeeD.HineR.E.MasonC.F.MorisonJ.I.L.RaymentM.D.van der BijlG.DobbsT. (2001), ‘Policy and practice. Policy challenges and priorities for internalizing the externalities of modern agriculture’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol 44, No 2, pp 263–283.
14.
PringleM.J.BratneyA.B.WhelanB.M.TaylorJ.A. (2003), ‘A preliminary approach for site-specific crop management in a field, using yield monitor data’, Agricultural Systems, Vol 76, pp 273–292.
15.
RöschC.DusseldorpM.MeyerR. (2005), ‘Precision Agriculture. 2. Bericht zum TA-Projekt. Moderne Agrartechniken und Produktionsmethoden – ökonomische und ökologische Potenziale’ [Precision Agriculture. 2nd report to the TA-project. New agricultural techniques and methods in agricultural production-economic and ecological potentials], TAB Arbeitsbericht, Vol 106, Berlin.
16.
SchmidtR.DiemannR. (1991), Erläuterungen zur Mittelmaßstäbigen Standortkartierung (MMK) [Explanantion Report to the Medium-Scale Field Mapping (MMK)], Forschungszentrum für Bodenfruchtbarkeit Müncheberg der Akademie der Landwissenschaften der DDR, Bereich Bodenkunde, Fernerkundung Eberswalde.
17.
SchneiderM. (2007), Personal correspondence within Pre Agro II project, Working paper, Daten zu Getreide-Feldversuchen in Wulfen, Ergebnisse zusätzlichen Kosten [Data for the Crop-Field Tests in Wulfen, Results of Additional Costs], Martin-Luther-Universität, Halle.
18.
SpashC.VatnA. (2006), ‘Transferring environmental value estimates: Issues and alternatives’, Ecological Economics, Vol 60, No 2, pp 379–388.
19.
WagnerP. (2006), Personal correspondence within Pre Agro II project, ‘Produktionsfunktionen und Precision Farming’ [Production function of precision agriculture), Martin-Luther-Universität, Halle.
20.
WernerA.KettnerE.PaulyJ.ReiningE.RothR.KühnJ.SeligeT.BobertJ.SchmidthalterU.HufnagelJ. (2002), ‘Ertragspotenzial von Teilflächen innerhalb von Ackerschlägen als Schlüsselgröße für die Bestandesführung von precision agriculture’ [Potentials of yield of site-specific farming within fields as key role in crop management], in BergerA.BronheimerA.JarfeA.KottenrodtD.RichterR.StahlK.WernerA., eds, Managementsystem für den ortsspezifischen Pflanzenbau [Management System for Site-Specific Crop Production], KTBL, Darmstadt, pp 193–196.
21.
WiggeringH.MüllerF. (2004), Umweltziele und Indikatoren [Environmental Objectives and Indicators], Springer Verlag, Berlin and Heidelberg.
22.
WilsonM.A.HoehnJ.P. (2006), ‘Valuing environmental goods and services using benefit transfer: The state-of-the-art and science’, Ecological Economics, Vol 60, No 2, pp 335–342.
23.
WindhorstW.ReicheE.W.RinkerA. (2004), ‘Regionaler Stoffhaushalt’ [Regional balance of matter), Managementsystem für den ortsspezifischen Pflanzenbau, pre agro I [Management System for Site-Specific Crop Production, pre agro I], Müncheberg, pp 63–100.
