Advertisement

Knowledge, Technology and Policy

, Volume 3, Issue 3, pp 67–75 | Cite as

Computers and the nature of farm management

  • Ulrich Nitsch
Feature Articles
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

The introduction of computer-based information systems to be used by farmers, as in many other fields, is preceded mostly by great expectations. Some persons even tend to think that eventually the computer might take over farm management. This article tries to make an assessment of the validity of such expectations. Based upon a study among Swedish farmers, it examines the nature of farmers' decision-making. The latter is based upon an adaptive rationality, as opposed to the normative models of formal rationality used by scientists. Essential to this rationality are coordination skills: the ability of farmers to arrange the many interacting factors important to the totality of a farm in a satisfactory way. What the farmer needs in this complex situation is personal communication and tacit knowledge, knowledge that cannot be reduced to facts and rules. Consequently computer-based information systems can be useful tools only in some aspects of farm management, but they will never replace farmer's decision-making. To understand the possibilities of the computer as a tool in farm management, a distinction between interpretation skills and application skills is necessary.

Keywords

Farm Management Adaptive Rationality Coordination Skill Application Skill Interpretation Skill 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersson, M., & Axelsson, S. (1988). Böndernas arbets och levandsvillkor.Examensarbete nr 4. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Extension Education, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, R.L., & Bunney, F.M. (1985).The new challenges for agricultural advisory services. Ninth Working Conference of Directors of Agricultural Advisory Services, OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
  3. Bernes, G., & Johanson, L. (1984). Böndernas syn på ledighet och trygghet.Examensarbete nr 85. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Extension Education, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  4. Ekman, L., & Nitsch, U. (1988). Datorkraft och bondförnuft (Report 1). Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Extension Education, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  5. Johannisson, B., & Gustafsson, B. (1984). Småföretagande på småort.Småskrift nr 22. Högskolan i Växjö.Google Scholar
  6. Landquist, B., & Lundkvist, L. (1983). Lantburkarnas behov av service och rådgivning i företagsledning.Examensarbete nr 74. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Extension Education, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  7. Nitsch, U. (1982). Farmers perceptions of and preferences concerning agricultural extension programs (Report 195). Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Extension Education, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  8. Nitsch, U. (1987). A persistent culture—Some reflections on Swedish family farming. In B. Galeski & E. Wilkening (Eds.),Family farming in Europe and America. Boulder and London: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  9. Schön, D.A. (1983).The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  10. Suppe, F. (1987). The limited applicability of agricultural research.Agriculture and Human Values, 4(4), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Sørlie, J.E. (1982). Papirløst lederskap (Report 28). Industriøkonomisk Institutt, Bergen, Norway.Google Scholar
  12. Weizenbaum, J. (1980). Once more, the computer revolution. In T. Forester (Ed.),The microelectronics revolution. Oxford: Basic Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulrich Nitsch
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Extension EducationSwedish University of Agricultural SciencesUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations