Farmers’ Perception of Precision Farming Technology among Hungarian Farmers

Many technologies have appeared in agriculture to reduce the harmful effects of chemical use. One of these technologies is precision farming technology. Precision farming technology should not be considered as only the latest plant production technology or only a new agro-management tool. It is achieved only when the results of electronics and IT equipment are realized in the variable rate treatments zone-by-zone. The advantages and disadvantages of this technology highly depend on the heterogeneity of soil, the knowledge and attitude of the manager and the staff. This is the reason why opinions about the technology effects are so wide. This paper shows the results of the investigation based on interviews about the adoption and knowledge of precision farming technology among Hungarian crop producers. This technology is mostly used by farms over 300 hectares with young farmers. The most characteristic elements were precision fertilization and tractor guidance. The survey examined three groups of farmers with respect to whether they apply precision farming elements or not. We refer to them as “users”, “planners” and “non-users”. According to the survey, the opinions of the “user” and the “non-user” groups of farmers are not significantly different regarding the impacts of precision farming technology (the main advantages were the change in yield quantity, chemical usage and income). Furthermore, the opinions of the farmers regarding the changes in variable costs resulting from the adoption of precision farming technology were also examined (measured in percent). Box-plot analysis was used for this examination. According to the opinion of the “user” group of farmers, the highest cost savings occurred in fertilizer and herbicide costs.

[1]  T. Kutter,et al.  The role of communication and co-operation in the adoption of precision farming , 2011, Precision Agriculture.

[2]  Gábor Szabó,et al.  THE IMPACT OF TRUST ON COOPERATIVE MEMBERSHIP PERFORMANCE AND SATISFACTION IN THE HUNGARIAN HORTICULTURE , 2007 .

[3]  I. Takács,et al.  Economic benefits of precision weed control and why its uptake is so slow , 2013 .

[4]  Zsolt Baranyai,et al.  Role of Trust in Cooperation of Farmers from the Aspects of New Institutional Economics , 2010 .

[5]  Hermann Auernhammer,et al.  Precision farming — the environmental challenge , 2001 .

[6]  Stan G. Daberkow,et al.  Farm and Operator Characteristics Affecting the Awareness and Adoption of Precision Agriculture Technologies in the US , 2003, Precision Agriculture.

[7]  Edward C. Luschei,et al.  Justification for site-specific weed management based on ecology and economics , 2005, Weed Science.

[8]  Katalin Takács-György,et al.  Risk Assessment and Examination of Economic Aspects of Precision Weed Management , 2011 .

[9]  László Fenyvesi,et al.  Boosting the competitiveness of agricultural production in Hungary through an innovation system , 2012 .

[10]  Tamás Németh,et al.  A precíziós-helyspecifikus növénytermesztés muszaki és térinformatikai feltételrendszere , 2001 .

[11]  Katalin Takács-György,et al.  Economic analysis of precision weed management , 2009 .

[12]  László Podmaniczky,et al.  Farming in protected landscape : economic analysis of the possibilities for sustainable agriculture on the outskirts of Kerekegyháza village, Hungary , 1997 .

[13]  Clement A. Tisdell,et al.  Why farmers continue to use pesticides despite environmental, health and sustainability costs , 2001 .

[14]  J. Pedersen,et al.  Adoption and perspectives of precision farming in Denmark , 2004 .

[15]  T. Griffin,et al.  ADOPTION, PROFITABILITY, AND MAKING BETTER USE OF PRECISION FARMING DATA , 2004 .

[16]  Ariel Zoltán Mitev,et al.  SPSS kutatási és adatelemzési kézikönyv , 2007 .

[17]  James Lowenberg-DeBoer,et al.  Economics of Site‐Specific Management in Agronomic Crops , 1997 .

[18]  Scott M. Swinton,et al.  Economics of site-specific weed management , 2005, Weed Science.

[19]  E. Schnug,et al.  Predicting sugar beet yield variability using yield maps of combinable crops and the 'monitor pedo cell' approach , 2005 .

[20]  Levente Barkaszi,et al.  Optimisation of the weed sampling system from an economic point of view on wheat (Triticum aestivum) stubble , 2007 .

[21]  Andras Nabradi.  ROLE OF INNOVATIONS AND KNOWLEDGE – INFRASTRUCTURE AND INSTITUTIONS , 2010 .

[22]  A. Vercelli,et al.  Sustainability : dynamics and uncertainty , 1998 .

[23]  Robert E. Blackshaw,et al.  Reduced herbicide doses in field crops: A review , 2006 .

[24]  César Fernández-Quintanilla,et al.  Simulating the effects of weed spatial pattern and resolution of mapping and spraying on economics of site-specific management , 2004 .

[25]  C. Anthony Di Benedetto,et al.  Diffusion of Innovation , 2015 .

[26]  Søren Marcus Pedersen,et al.  Socioeconomic impact of widespread adoption of precision farming and controlled traffic systems in Denmark , 2012, Precision Agriculture.

[27]  Roland Gerhards,et al.  The Economic Impact of Site-Specific Weed Control , 2003, Precision Agriculture.

[28]  Mariusz Maciejczak.  The concept of smart specialisation in the development of agribusiness sector on the example of cluster of innovations in agribusiness in Mazovia province , 2012 .

[29]  Terry L. Kastens,et al.  An economic evaluation of site-specific herbicide application , 2006, Precision Agriculture.

[30]  Gábor Szabó,et al.  ANALYSIS OF MACHINE USE IN HUNGARIAN AGRICULTURE – IS THERE ANY FUTURE FOR MACHINERY SHARING ARRANGEMENTS? , 2014 .

[31]  Tasnee Attanandana,et al.  Empowering Farmer Leaders to Acquire and Practice Site-Specific Nutrient Management Technology , 2007 .

[32]  Katalin Takacs-Gyorgy,et al.  ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF AN AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION – PRECISION CROP PRODUCTION , 2012 .