Tools like automated guidance, yield monitors, grid soil sampling, section control, and variable rate application are widely seen as a path toward more efficient, more profitable farming. Yet farmers often struggle to identify exactly what financial return you might get from these investments. Purdue Ag Econ professor Chad Fiechter says, on average, most precision ag bundles are not associated with improved efficiency.
“Of the 17 different combinations we examined, only two showed statistically meaningful gains: automated guidance on its own, and the combination of yield monitors with grid soil sampling.”
That information comes from a recent study out of the Purdue Center for Commercial Agriculture. Fiechter says this doesn’t mean precision ag has no value.
“But it does mean that the added cost of most technology bundles is not being offset by higher revenue. If your operation is already well-managed, there’s no strong financial case to rush into adoption.”
One of the most striking findings in the study is that less efficient farms benefit the most from these technologies.
“When we looked at farms with the largest opportunity for improvement, or those in the bottom quartile of efficiency, five of the 17 bundles showed meaningful gains, most of them involving four or more technologies used together. This result points to a catch-up effect: precision agriculture helps close management gaps that better-run operations have already addressed through experience and strong management practices.”
So, Fiechter’s bottom line is that if your farm is already well managed, you shouldn’t feel any pressure to rush out and adopt new technologies thinking it will generate more revenue. However, “If precision agriculture technology leads to benefits like lifestyle or comfort and a farm can afford the technology, the choice to adopt should be considered logical.”
Read more about the Purdue report by visiting the Purdue Center for Commercial Agriculture Website.
