|
PROJECT NO. |
178 |
Project Title
|
Effective
computer-mediated decision support in the ‘pragmatist’ market. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Project Leader
|
Lisa
Brennan |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Organisation |
CSIRO
Sustainable Ecosystems |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Funding
Body |
RIRDC |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Administration
Contact |
Allan Kearns CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems GPO Box 284 Canberra ACT 2601 Ph:
02 6242 1783 Fax:
02 6242 1742 Email:
allen.kearns@csiro.au |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Commencement Date |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Completion Date |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Research
Proposal Summary |
Over a quarter of a century after
the computerised decision support system (DSS) idea arrived in agriculture,
75 per cent of Australian farmers own and use computers, hundreds of decision
support packages are readily available and affordable, yet nowhere can it be
said that computerised DSS is an integral part of the management of the
contemporary Australian family farm. Cognisant of this, APSRU has conducted
research over the past 10 years that has resulted in the development of an
approach, which has demonstrated that farmers, their advisers and researchers
can jointly explore alternative farm management practices by testing and
using computer simulation of farming systems. Farmer participants in this
alternative, FARMSCAPE approach (Farmers, Advisers, Researchers, Monitoring,
Simulation, Communication And Performance Evaluation) have experienced
significant benefits to their management (www.farmscape.cse.csiro.au).
The approach offers a promising alternative to traditional extension
concerning matters of tactical risk management and strategic planning. A major challenge for delivery of
this approach is gaining the attention of farmers beyond ‘Innovator’ and
‘Early Adopter’ types to those who comprise the majority – a section of the
market that cannot be ignored if the risk of environmental degradation is to
be adequately managed. This proposal concerns the testing of a new strategy
for penetrating the ‘Early Majority’ market for improved risk management.
According to traditional technological diffusion theory, adoption progresses
through a community over time according to rates described by a “bell” curve. Promotion of a new
technology is targeted initially at the first category i.e. the innovators.
Success in ‘selling’ the technology to other adopter categories (i.e. the
early majority, late majority, laggards) assumes the process of diffusion, in
which later adopters use earlier adopters as their reference point. However,
for certain types of technologies, including computerised DSS, the
experiences of the ‘visionaries’ do not serve to reduce uncertainties about
the technology for the ‘pragmatists’. While visionaries are motivated to use
new technology to get a competitive edge, pragmatists want the benefits of
new technology to improve existing processes and want to avoid risks
associated with the new technology. Consequently, pragmatists see visionaries
as insufficiently like them to serve as relevant uncertainty-reducing
referents. Therefore the diffusion of technology across adopter categories is
anything but smooth, pointing to the existence of a chasm separating two
distinct market places for technology products. The FARMSCAPE experience has been that while the initial
positive responses came from 'visionaries', the group processes deployed
resulted in a degree of penetration to 'pragmatist' farmers that was
sufficient to motivate agribusiness to invest in developing FARMSCAPE
services. However, given the tendency of agribusiness to focus their work on
‘visionaries’, there is a risk that
the pragmatist market will be left behind. This project targets the task of
creating the first reference groups of satisfied pragmatist adopters among
agribusiness clients. This will be done by bypassing the diffusion process,
working with agribusiness advisers, and utilising core aspects of the
FARMSCAPE approach to alleviate the uncertainties preventing adoption for
‘pragmatists’. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Aims |
§
To
demonstrate a way to effectively implement powerful computer-mediated
decision support for risk management in dryland farming among a sufficient
segment of the farming community to enable a viable commercial agribusiness
service. §
To
contribute within an existing network of consultants and farmers in which the
FARMSCAPE approach to decision support is being implemented in the Northern
Cropping Region by intervening to create reference groups of satisfied
adopters among ‘late adopter’ categories of ‘farmers who are crucial to the
diffusion process required for viable market volume. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Potential
Outcomes |
§
Benefits
from computer-mediated risk management support, previously confined to the
“early adopter” market, more equitably distributed - Australian farmers in the mainstream
provided with increased capacity to manage climatic risk, strategically plan
enterprise shifts, and weigh economic-environmental tradeoffs. §
Consolidation
of the provision of a novel risk management service for crop producers in the
Northern Region by four agribusiness firms raising the ceiling market for a
technology normally of interest only to farmer ‘technology enthusiasts.’ § Increased awareness of the
potential of these approaches in other regions of Australia. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Milestones |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Budget
RIRDC 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 TOTAL
$ Salaries and On Costs 40,000 40,000 40,000 120,000 Travel 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 Operating 35,000 35,000 35,000 105,000 Capital (equipment) 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 RIRDC Total* 95,000 95,000 95,000 285,000 RESEARCH ORGANISATION* 95,000 95,000 95,000 285,000 Total of INDUSTRY & OTHER FUNDING* (Non
levy and in-kind contributions PROJECT TOTAL* 190,000 190,000 190,000 570,000 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Resource Requirements & Contributions |
Staff % /
year |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Prior Provision of IP & Rights of
Ownership
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ownership, equity in and use of IP to be
developed |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rights of Publication |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Strategic Plan KRA Area |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Relevance to Strategic Plan |
|