Stirzaker, R.J. (2006).
.
Soil moisture monitoring: state of play and barriers to adoption.
CRC for Irrigation Futures, Sydney..
 |
Abstract/Summary
Australian scientists have been in the forefront of research into the measurement of soil water, the fundamental processes that drive the flow of water through soils and uptake by plant roots. Australian companies have turned much of this knowledge into commercial products, which are sold around the world. Over the last decade, tens of millions of dollars have been spent by State extension agencies to get these products more widely understood and used by irrigators.
We have good statistics on the use of soil water monitoring products by farmers because questions about irrigation scheduling are included in the agricultural census. The figures show that 13% of irrigators used soil moisture monitoring products in 1996, and this had increased to 22% by 2003. Whereas the increase in adoption rates is heartening, it is sobering to realize that almost four out of every five farmers who derive their living from using water do not measure how much water is in their soil. Moreover, the most recent statistics show that only 9% of growers plan future investment in soil water monitoring equipment.
This study was commissioned to find out why such excellent knowledge and products have only reached one fifth of the irrigation industry. Through discussions with researchers and extension workers, seven obstacles to the adoption of irrigation scheduling emerged. The most obvious barrier was that many irrigators were not
convinced that irrigation scheduling should be a priority. They had limited data on the water they actually used, or should use, and there were few accessible champions to learn from. Second the entrenched culture was resistant to change, and inherited knowledge or the status quo was seen as adequate. Third, many lacked the confidence that investing in these new tools would pay off.
Fourth there were structural barriers that made it hard to start, like schemes where water is not available on demand, limitations to farm layout, poor distribution uniformities and labour shortages.
Fifth, there was concern over the complexity of the tool and the uncertainty of which tools were best suited to which applications.
The final two obstacles concerned the world views of the scientists and extension workers compared to that of the irrigators themselves. Scientists were more concerned about accuracy, whereas irrigators are concerned with managing risk. The technology transfer mindset of the extension worker wants to wean irrigators away from subjective
experience onto the solid ground of objective quantification. Yet one of the most intriguing aspects of all the surveys is the central role that local knowledge plays in irrigation management. There are likely to be rich new insights at the interface between scientist and irrigator knowledge systems that are yet untapped.
Despite the relatively low adoption figures and the above barriers, there is cause for optimism. The 10% increase in adoption of soil moisture monitoring tools over the past 7 years has captured many of the leading growers and opinion leaders. These leaders have started to make the irrigation debate more quantitative. Many know how much water they use, how much they can save, and, by onitoring the soil water status, how to do it. Those who do not monitor are slowly being drawn into the quantitative debate, and are beginning to see how much room they have to move. |
URL
http://www.irrigationfutures.org.au/news.asp?catID=12&ID=440 |
Project
3.07 - Tools and techniques for improving the precision of irrigation |
