CLIMALERT − Summary

Information needs for German farmers

Despite the reservations that farmers have about weather-related information and its reliability, the results of the demand analysis provide a clear overview of the types of weather-related information that farmers require at each phase of a crop’s life. This section summaries the information needs as well as draws out the specific demands that farmers expressed for the tool in terms of content, usability and presentation.

In a first step, we investigated the weather-related information needs for three crops. The results of the workshop and interviews show that the information needs and weather-related risks for different crops are in fact similar. The most important difference is the timing of ploughing and sowing. For example, farmers have better chances of effectively sowing crops in early spring than in autumn. The following table summarises the information needs and risks. It provides information that can help in the developments of DMSs. By understanding the information needs as well as the weather-related risks the influence each of the four decisions, we are able to develop DMSs, which in turn help us to understand how the CLIMALERT tool might be used by end users and therefore, to identify the requirements of the tool.

Table: A summary of weather-related information needs at each stage of the crop’s life (98.4 KB)

The weather-related information is of great importance. However, of equal importance is the quality and usability of the CLIMALERT tool. Farmers expressed four broad demands: reliable information, clearly communicated information, regional information and better opportunities for information providers to exchange. Each of these topics will be discussed in more detail in turn in the following paragraphs.

Reliable information:

From their experience, most farmers will not take their decisions based on the weather if the potential for rain is not above a certain percent: “It won’t rain here unless the weather forecast says it is 85% likely” (I5). When the forecast says “50% chance of rain, in my experience … for this program at least, I believe, it makes more sense to not report any chance of rain”. Others believe that a rain radar is much more helpful than a percentage (I3). Examples of helpful rain radars are Bayer, Wetter.com and Wetteronline.

In addition, most interviewees, when asked what information they would like the ideal tool to include, said that they would like to see reliable forecasts for 2 – 5 days and also longer if possible (I3, I5, I6, I8, I10):

• “I would like to have 90% certainty for 2 days” (I10).
• “I would like to have a stable weather forecast for the next three days. Whether for temperature, rain or wind. We live in a rhythm which, I would say, whether it is fertilising or pesticide application, we have to make a decision within three days … and this is something that we cannot get from other services, this three-day forecast … when we could get a better forecast from these data [from UFZ] … I would say … I would happily pay money for it” (I5).
• “I would like information about everything to do with moisture. How it is going to rain, where it is going to rain … A trend plus five days. I don’t believe anything else anyway, because statistically … every day the likelihood of rain is 30% worse and then after four of five days. It’s just all bullshit” (I6).

Clearly communicated information:

Those with weather stations which were installed and are used by the UFZ are interested in receiving access to that information in an easy to use and accessible way (I1, I2, I5). For example, I2 understood that the UFZ measures sun radiation and would like to know more about this and how it might influence his crops.

Regional forecasts:

In general farmers would like to see regional weather forecasts. Current weather forecasts are perceived to be to unreliable because they are not regionally specific (I1, I2, I3, I5, I7) – “A regional app that is able to provide forecasts for a number of local areas and not just, I would say, the whole of Saxony-Anhalt or north Saxony-Anhalt … so it is really important for us, specific as possible information for our area, and our area is really large … 100 x 100 km” (I5).

Better opportunities for exchange:

I1 suggested the development of a platform which farmers could use to share stories in relation to what different people did as a result of different weather events and what they learnt. He stressed that it is not about what one should do but rather what different people did and what the results of their actions were – “there are situations where one doesn’t have any experience and therefore doesn’t know what one can do” (I1).

I1 also suggested the need for a better exchange between actors like research institutes such as the UFZ and the German Weather Service (DWD) – “I have the feeling that everyone is just out there doing their own thing”.

I11 suggested that the CLIMALERT tool should not focus on telling farmers what to do but rather provide an opportunity for farmers to share their knowledge.

This information will be taken into account in the development of the first version of the Climalert mobile application which will be available for end users to test by autumn 2019.