Portrait
Sustainable Cities and Communities
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Life on land
Responsible
consumption and production
Cities and Mobility
Building and Construction
Finance
Circular economy
Forest Management
Supply Chains
Agriculture and Nutrition
Governance
Sustainable Behaviour
Decarbonisation of the transport sector
Post-fossil cities
Co-evolution of business strategies and resource policies in the building industry
Ecological footprint in the housing sector
Financing clean tech
Sustainable finance
Laboratory for circular economy
Towards a sustainable circular economy
Challenges of modular water infrastructure systems
Resource efficiency in Swiss hospitals
Ecosystem services in forests
Trade‐offs in forests
Insurance value of forest ecosystems
Enhancing supply chain sustainability
Sustainable Public Procurement (SPP)
Open assessment of Swiss economy and society
Digital innovations for sustainable agriculture
Impacts of Swiss food consumption and trade
Interaction of economy and ecology in Swiss farms
Switzerland’s sustainability footprint
Sustainable Trade Relations for Diversified Food Systems
Green labour market effects
Voluntary corporate environmental initiatives
Legal framework for a resource-efficient circular economy
Nudging small and medium-sized companies
Rebound Effects of the Sharing Economy
Sustainable consumer behaviour
Extending the lifespan of mobile devices
The influence of environmental identities

Digital innovations for sustainable agriculture

New information and communication technologies have the potential to reduce the environmental footprint of Swiss agriculture without restricting food output. Political support, amongst other things, is needed to realise the potential of precision agriculture.

Background

New digital technologies are making it possible to use agricultural production factors such as fertilisers and plant protection agents with greater precision, thereby increasing the environmental compatibility of farming without reducing food output. A holistic approach to technical, agronomic, and socio-economic factors can generate added value for the Swiss agricultural and agri-food system.

Aims

The aim of the project was to highlight how new information and communication technologies, such as the use of remote sensing (e.g. via satellites or drones), could contribute to the sustainable development of Swiss agriculture. We examined new applications – e.g. in the use of drones – relating to fertiliser usage and quantified their environmental impact. The aim was also to determine the costs and benefits of digital technologies, thereby providing a decision-making basis for management and policy measures.

Results

Nitrogen use in agriculture can be reduced

Our findings from several field trials show that sensors can precisely measure the uneven distribution and emission of nitrogen compounds in the field. Thus information from satellites or drones can help significantly to reduce nitrogen use without affecting yield. The measurements of greenhouse gas emissions also imply that optimised fertiliser application and crop rotation with a high degree of coverage all the year round can have a positive environmental impact.

 

Demand for reliable precision technologies is increasing

The economic analysis of precision agriculture procedures shows that, although there is financial added value for farmers, this is often too small to justify large investments in digital technologies. However, rising fertiliser prices are making these technologies a more attractive proposition. Cross-enterprise collaboration and state support are also increasing the demand for precision agriculture. Surveys show that Swiss farmers are open to the idea of precision agriculture if the technology is reliable and technical support is available.

 

Digital innovation calls for a holistic approach

From an agricultural policy point of view, our findings show that a holistic approach is needed to any possible funding of digital innovations in agriculture. There are five key aspects to this:

1) Digital infrastructure needs to be more broadly established.

2) Knowledge of new technologies has to be promoted. This requires training, and dialogue in farming networks.

3) There need to be clear rules on how data from different stakeholders can be used.

4) Since it would not make sense for every farm to make major investments, overarching perspectives are required.

5) Policy measures should not be geared to specific technologies, but explicitly to reducing environmental footprint with no detriment to production.

Implications for research

The interdisciplinary research carried out by the InnoFarm project has shown the importance of taking a holistic view of the challenges posed by new digital technologies. The project made specific technical research contributions in relation to the use of imaging procedures and measured the exchange of gases on arable farmland. Moreover, by linking these findings with agronomic research and incorporating them into agricultural policy deliberations, it was able to highlight new research perspectives for sustainable agriculture.

Implications for practice

The project provides a knowledge base for the use of precision technologies and fertilisers and for crop rotation decisions in Swiss agriculture. However, the findings also show that government must play a key role in realising the environmental and economic potential of these technologies. All stakeholders need to work together to enable new information and communication technologies to play their part in sustainable agriculture.

Publications

Precision Farming at the Nexus of Agricultural Production and the Environment

Finger, R. et al. (2019) “Precision farming at the nexus of Agricultural Production and the environment,” Annual Review of Resource Economics, 11(1), pp. 313–335. 

Read now
Greenhouse gas fluxes (CO2, N2O and CH4) of pea and maize during two cropping seasons: Drivers, budgets, and emission factors for nitrous oxide

Maier, R., Hörtnagl, L. and Buchmann, N. (2022) “Greenhouse gas fluxes (CO2, N2O and CH4) of pea and maize during two cropping seasons: Drivers, budgets, and emission factors for nitrous oxide,” Science of The Total Environment, 849, p. 157541. 

Read now
Global maps of soil temperature

Lembrechts, J.J. et al. (2022) “Global maps of soil temperature,” Global Change Biology, 28(9), pp. 3110–3144. 

Read now
Benefits of Increasing Information Accuracy in Variable Rate Technologies

Späti, K., Huber, R. and Finger, R. (2021) “Benefits of increasing information accuracy in Variable Rate Technologies,” Ecological Economics, 185, p. 107047. 

Read now
Insights for the Partitioning of Ecosystem Evaporation and Transpiration in Short‐Statured Croplands

Paul‐Limoges, E. et al. (2022) “Insights for the partitioning of ecosystem evaporation and transpiration in short‐statured croplands,” Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 127(7). 

Read now
The FLUXNET2015 dataset and the ONEFlux processing pipeline for eddy covariance data

Pastorello, G. et al. (2020) “The FLUXNET2015 dataset and the ONEFlux processing pipeline for Eddy Covariance Data,” Scientific Data, 7(1). 

Read now
Incentivizing the adoption of precision agricultural technologies in small‐scaled farming systems: A choice experiment approach

Späti, K. et al. (2022) “Incentivizing the adoption of precision agricultural technologies in small‐scaled farming systems: A choice experiment approach,” Journal of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, 1(3), pp. 236–253. 

Read now
Scenarios for European agricultural policymaking in the era of digitalisation

Ehlers, M.-H. et al. (2022) “Scenarios for European agricultural policymaking in the era of Digitalisation,” Agricultural Systems, 196, p. 103318. 

Read now
The role of contractors in the uptake of precision farming—A spatial economic analysis

Wang, Y., Huber, R. and Finger, R. (2022) “The role of contractors in the uptake of precision farming—a spatial economic analysis,” Q Open, 2(1). 

Read now
Gap-filling eddy covariance methane fluxes: Comparison of machine learning model predictions and uncertainties at FLUXNET-CH4 wetlands

Irvin, J. et al. (2021) “GAP-filling eddy covariance methane fluxes: Comparison of machine learning model predictions and uncertainties at FLUXNET-CH4 wetlands,” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 308-309, p. 108528. 

Read now
SoilTemp: A global database of near‐surface temperature

Lembrechts, J.J. et al. (2020) “SoilTemp: A global database of near‐surface temperature,” Global Change Biology, 26(11), pp. 6616–6629. 

Read now
Altered energy partitioning across terrestrial ecosystems in the European drought year 2018

Graf, A. et al. (2020) “Altered energy partitioning across terrestrial ecosystems in the European drought year 2018,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375(1810), p. 20190524. 

Read now
Data on the stated adoption decisions of Swiss farmers for variable rate nitrogen fertilization technologies

Späti, K. et al. (2022) “Data on the stated adoption decisions of Swiss farmers for variable rate nitrogen fertilization technologies,” Data in Brief, 41, p. 107979. 

Read now
FLUXNET-CH4: a global, multi-ecosystem dataset and analysis of methane seasonality from freshwater wetlands

Delwiche, K.B. et al. (2021) “Fluxnet-ch4: A global, multi-ecosystem dataset and analysis of methane seasonality from freshwater wetlands,” Earth System Science Data, 13(7), pp. 3607–3689. 

Read now
Opinion: Smart farming is key to developing sustainable agriculture

Walter, A. et al. (2017) “Smart farming is key to developing sustainable agriculture,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(24), pp. 6148–6150. 

Read now

Project leaders​

Prof. Dr. Robert Finger
Gruppe für Agrarökonomie und -politik, ETH Zürich

Dr. Robert Huber
Gruppe für Agrarökonomie und -politik, ETH Zürich

Prof. Dr. Nina Buchmann
Institut für Agrarwissenschaften, ETH Zürich

Prof. Dr. Achim Walter
Institut für Agrarwissenschaften, ETH Zürich

Project partners

DigiN Project (Agroscope)

European Association of Remote Sensing Laboratories - EARSeL

Nitrogäu Project (FiBL)

SENsing of Scalable ECOphysiological traits – Senseco (COST action)

« 

Swiss agriculture is facing major challenges. Projects like this one enable cooperation between research, extension services and farmers. They help to ensure that Switzerland remains at the forefront with innovative technologies.

 »
Michael FeitknechtFenaco (Head of Department Crop Production and Member of the Executive Board)
« 

The collaboration with the research team was beneficial uncomplicated and unbureaucratic, especially during the difficult Corona pandemic - and certainly the research project was a great benefit for everyone.

 »
Andreas SchwabSolothurner Bauernverband Dienstleistungen AG (Managing Director SOBV)
« 

With the support of the latest technologies, we strengthen our agriculture and food sector - the research project is an examplary proof of this. Digitalisation increases competitiveness, promotes sustainability and simplifies the administrative burden. These are precisely the goals we are also pursuing with Swiss agricultural policy.

 »
Christian HoferBundesamt für Landwirtschaft (Director Federal Office for Agriculture )

Viewpoint

Focus

Choose one or multiple of the above terms for highlighting the respective datasets on the Website.