K
Kathleen Martin
Guest
The Australian Broadband Advisory Council today released a report on digital agriculture. Widespread adoption of digital agriculture is critical to lifting the value of Australian agriculture from $60 billion to $100 billion by 2030, an objective set by the Australian Government.
The report considered three questions.
Does a ‘connectivity threshold’ exist in regional and rural Australia where connectivity becomes an enabler of digital agriculture, rather than a drag on it?
Connectivity to support digital agriculture is required across the entire farming operation, and not just at the homestead: connectivity out in the paddock for soil moisture probes; down by the creek, dams and bores for real time monitoring of water usage; on the move around the farm as digitally tractors work; and above the farm as drones strike at weeds.
However, the report found that across the country, beneath the broad brush strokes of mobile coverage and National Broadband Network (NBN) fixed and wireless networks, there are localised connectivity gaps on, across and between farms. The report called this patchiness ‘salt and pepper connectivity’.
Salt and pepper connectivity, in human geography terms, is all about scale. Salt and pepper connectivity is experienced not at the national or state level or even local government area level, but at the local community level, with variability between neighbouring farms or even across an individual farm. The report provides a case study of Tony, a cotton farmer 8kms outside Narrabri. In an effort to achieve greater water efficiency, Tony has spent $1.5 million on a large lateral irrigator with an onboard SIM connected to the mobile network. The idea is that the ‘robot’ can roll across the farm watering at night and can ‘call out’ by messaging Tony’s mobile phone when it has fallen over and needs him to get out of bed to right it. Tony’s farm is within line of sight of a mobile tower on a mountain about 45kms away. However, as coverage is patchy and variable on his farm, he cannot count of the ‘robot’ being online, and so he still has to get up during the night to manually check it.
If the threshold has not been crossed, what connectivity is required for digital agriculture to be put in place and what measures can be taken to get it in place?
If the problem is salt and pepper connectivity, the ultimate goal has to be ubiquitous connectivity across farms: or as NBN puts it “no paddock left behind”. However, the report concludes that carrier mobile and fixed wireless networks may not necessarily be the best way of achieving that goal:
National carriers may continue to be the primary providers of connectivity in rural Australia, but their focus – in terms of both technology and business outcomes – is on serving premises and ‘people on the move’ along transport corridors.
Carrier networks, by business case and technology, are geared to solve connectivity issues at large scale – which means premises and vehicles, not paddocks and cows.
Continue reading: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=b3d7b08d-f3a4-446b-a3f4-96b5f8a754bb
The report considered three questions.
Does a ‘connectivity threshold’ exist in regional and rural Australia where connectivity becomes an enabler of digital agriculture, rather than a drag on it?
Connectivity to support digital agriculture is required across the entire farming operation, and not just at the homestead: connectivity out in the paddock for soil moisture probes; down by the creek, dams and bores for real time monitoring of water usage; on the move around the farm as digitally tractors work; and above the farm as drones strike at weeds.
However, the report found that across the country, beneath the broad brush strokes of mobile coverage and National Broadband Network (NBN) fixed and wireless networks, there are localised connectivity gaps on, across and between farms. The report called this patchiness ‘salt and pepper connectivity’.
Salt and pepper connectivity, in human geography terms, is all about scale. Salt and pepper connectivity is experienced not at the national or state level or even local government area level, but at the local community level, with variability between neighbouring farms or even across an individual farm. The report provides a case study of Tony, a cotton farmer 8kms outside Narrabri. In an effort to achieve greater water efficiency, Tony has spent $1.5 million on a large lateral irrigator with an onboard SIM connected to the mobile network. The idea is that the ‘robot’ can roll across the farm watering at night and can ‘call out’ by messaging Tony’s mobile phone when it has fallen over and needs him to get out of bed to right it. Tony’s farm is within line of sight of a mobile tower on a mountain about 45kms away. However, as coverage is patchy and variable on his farm, he cannot count of the ‘robot’ being online, and so he still has to get up during the night to manually check it.
If the threshold has not been crossed, what connectivity is required for digital agriculture to be put in place and what measures can be taken to get it in place?
If the problem is salt and pepper connectivity, the ultimate goal has to be ubiquitous connectivity across farms: or as NBN puts it “no paddock left behind”. However, the report concludes that carrier mobile and fixed wireless networks may not necessarily be the best way of achieving that goal:
National carriers may continue to be the primary providers of connectivity in rural Australia, but their focus – in terms of both technology and business outcomes – is on serving premises and ‘people on the move’ along transport corridors.
Carrier networks, by business case and technology, are geared to solve connectivity issues at large scale – which means premises and vehicles, not paddocks and cows.
Continue reading: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=b3d7b08d-f3a4-446b-a3f4-96b5f8a754bb
