<p>This is a placeholder answer in anticipation of (1) the question being closed before I can write a valid answer, and (2) I will replace this placeholder with a valid answer.</p>

<p>I have now partially filled in the placeholder, but what I wrote obviously still needs references.</p>

<hr>

<p>The hope is that precision agriculture will be the basis for the next Green Revolution. The first Green Revolution started in the late 1950s and picked up steam during the 1960s. These techniques, now 50 to 60 years old, drastically changed farming in many developing countries, and even turned some of those countries from net food importers to net food exporters. The gains from those now dated techniques have plateaued in many places as of late; in some places productivity has even begun declining.</p>

<p>The goals of precision agriculture are to integrate many aspects of the earth and agricultural sciences with late 20th / early 21st century technology (modern direct sensing, remote sensing, internet of things, big data, ...)  so as to identify on a very precise scale exactly which land areas are in need of enhanced irrigation, fertilization, insecticides, herbicides, etc., -- and which areas are just fine as-is. The hopes are that this will reduce the overall need for irrigation, etc., thereby reducing stress on the land, and that this will be largely automated, thereby reducing the workload on farm workers.</p>

<p>These are the aims and hopes. The concepts do appear to be working in highly developed areas. But whether they can work well in the developing world is a bit suspect, let alone whether they can work at all in undeveloped areas of the world.</p>

<p>The bigger problem is that many estimates indicate the Earth's human population will increase by almost thirty per cent in just thirty years (from a bit over 7.5 billion to almost 10 billion) -- and that increase will be happening while the first Green Revolution is plateauing / declining. Something has to be done lest many parts of the world fall into famine. Precision agriculture might be one way address this bigger problem. Or it might not.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-05T23:54:12.017Z
2020-05-06T19:51:13.287Z
2020-05-06T19:51:13.287Z
David Hammen
<p>I am just wondering what is the real impact of Precision agriculture. I came across Airbus Intelligence and their Earth Observation services (Agriculture, forestry, environment) - It seems nice and attractive - however What is the real impact of using it? </p>

<p>PS: You can link me even French articles or topics (I am curious about French agriculture)</p>

<p>Thanks!   </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-04T19:00:44.883Z
Questions regarding agriculture are only on topic here if they relate to the effect of agriculture on the Earth. When the question is concerned about agricultural yields & farming practices, then the question is off topic here.
Fred
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-05T03:52:10.167Z
@Fred: Read the agriculture tag. It strongly suggests that all aspects of agriculture are on-topic here, as does this meta.stackexchange question, [Where can I ask agriculture-related questions? And will there be a site on SE for them?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/295119) We have a problem here, which I am raising as an issue on the Earth Science meta. This question *might* be on-topic on the sustainability or gardening sister sites, but the way this question has been asked, it is also on topic here.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-05T07:47:26.037Z
@David Thank you David. I was wondering what is bad about this question. In the end, PA should have also impact on earth's surface (intensification, extensification, fertilization)
Luckasino
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-05T15:12:33.123Z
Also, this question actually contains 3 very different questions. The last two (does PA add more value? and Do you know farmers experiences/opinions?) seem clearly off topic to me. The first one (the impact) could be interpreted in terms of Earth science, but is way to broad... Voting to close until edited to one, more focused question.
Jean-Marie Prival
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-05T15:17:44.077Z
Well, actually I've studied Life sciences, so I am watching the tag and hope that I will answer some questions related to agriculture. It makes a sense that agriculture topic should be there with all practices. For example, Agriculture, forestry and other types of land use account for 23% of human greenhouse gas emissions according to IPCC so yeah it's very important Earth science...
Luckasino
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-05T17:07:31.253Z
@Jean-MariePrival Um, I see 43 questions tagged agriculture with 8 _unanswered_, so about 80% rate.  Do you have a filter on?
Deditos
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-05T23:58:48.030Z
This site is getting more and more like stack overflow, where people regularly voted to close questions in which those particular people had no expertise. It was rather disgusting and was the key reason I, along with many others, stopped participating at that original corner of the SE network.
David Hammen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-06T07:41:43.147Z
@Deditos My bad, I did have a filter on.
Jean-Marie Prival
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-06T19:52:00.083Z
I'll vote to reopen. I started a meta discussion on agriculture on the earth science meta site.
David Hammen
<agriculture><satellites><weather-satellites>
What is real impact of Precision Agriculture?
Luckasino
# What is real impact of Precision Agriculture?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-05-04)

I am just wondering what is the real impact of Precision agriculture. I came across Airbus Intelligence and their Earth Observation services (Agriculture, forestry, environment) - It seems nice and attractive - however What is the real impact of using it?

PS: You can link me even French articles or topics (I am curious about French agriculture)

Thanks!

**Tags:** agriculture, satellites, weather-satellites

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Questions regarding agriculture are only on topic here if they relate to the effect of agriculture on the Earth. When the question is concerned about agricultural yields & farming practices, then the question is off topic here.  
> **username_2**: @username_1: Read the agriculture tag. It strongly suggests that all aspects of agriculture are on-topic here, as does this meta.stackexchange question, [Where can I ask agriculture-related questions? And will there be a site on SE for them?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/295119) We have a problem here, which I am raising as an issue on the Earth Science meta. This question *might* be on-topic on the sustainability or gardening sister sites, but the way this question has been asked, it is also on topic here.  
> **username_0**: @username_2 Thank you username_2. I was wondering what is bad about this question. In the end, PA should have also impact on earth's surface (intensification, extensification, fertilization)  
> **username_3**: Also, this question actually contains 3 very different questions. The last two (does PA add more value? and Do you know farmers experiences/opinions?) seem clearly off topic to me. The first one (the impact) could be interpreted in terms of Earth science, but is way to broad... Voting to close until edited to one, more focused question.  
> **username_0**: Well, actually I've studied Life sciences, so I am watching the tag and hope that I will answer some questions related to agriculture. It makes a sense that agriculture topic should be there with all practices. For example, Agriculture, forestry and other types of land use account for 23% of human greenhouse gas emissions according to IPCC so yeah it's very important Earth science...  
> **username_4**: @username_3 Um, I see 43 questions tagged agriculture with 8 _unanswered_, so about 80% rate.  Do you have a filter on?  
> **username_2**: This site is getting more and more like stack overflow, where people regularly voted to close questions in which those particular people had no expertise. It was rather disgusting and was the key reason I, along with many others, stopped participating at that original corner of the SE network.  
> **username_3**: @username_4 My bad, I did have a filter on.  
> **username_2**: I'll vote to reopen. I started a meta discussion on agriculture on the earth science meta site.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2020-05-05. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

This is a placeholder answer in anticipation of (1) the question being closed before I can write a valid answer, and (2) I will replace this placeholder with a valid answer.

I have now partially filled in the placeholder, but what I wrote obviously still needs references.

---

The hope is that precision agriculture will be the basis for the next Green Revolution. The first Green Revolution started in the late 1950s and picked up steam during the 1960s. These techniques, now 50 to 60 years old, drastically changed farming in many developing countries, and even turned some of those countries from net food importers to net food exporters. The gains from those now dated techniques have plateaued in many places as of late; in some places productivity has even begun declining.

The goals of precision agriculture are to integrate many aspects of the earth and agricultural sciences with late 20th / early 21st century technology (modern direct sensing, remote sensing, internet of things, big data, ...) so as to identify on a very precise scale exactly which land areas are in need of enhanced irrigation, fertilization, insecticides, herbicides, etc., -- and which areas are just fine as-is. The hopes are that this will reduce the overall need for irrigation, etc., thereby reducing stress on the land, and that this will be largely automated, thereby reducing the workload on farm workers.

These are the aims and hopes. The concepts do appear to be working in highly developed areas. But whether they can work well in the developing world is a bit suspect, let alone whether they can work at all in undeveloped areas of the world.

The bigger problem is that many estimates indicate the Earth's human population will increase by almost thirty per cent in just thirty years (from a bit over 7.5 billion to almost 10 billion) -- and that increase will be happening while the first Green Revolution is plateauing / declining. Something has to be done lest many parts of the world fall into famine. Precision agriculture might be one way address this bigger problem. Or it might not.


---

