D5.2 agri xchange final sra_final

961 views
898 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
961
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
17
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

D5.2 agri xchange final sra_final

  1. 1. Final SRA ‘CommonBasis for policy makingfor introduction ofinnovative approacheson data exchange inagri-food industry’ network for data exchange in agriculture
  2. 2. Final Strategic Research Agenda (SRA):Common Basis for policymaking for the introduction of innovativeapproaches to data exchange in the agri-food industryKarel Charvat, Sarka Horakova, Sjaak Wolfert, Henri Holster, Otto Schmid, LiisaPesonen, Daniel Martini, Esther Mietzsch, Tomas Mildorf (WP5)28. 11. 2012FinalD 5.2. th agriXchange is funded by the European Commission’s 7 Framework Programme, Contract no. 244957
  3. 3. About the agriXchange projectagriXchange is a EU-funded project and it is a coordination and support action to setup anetwork for developing a system for common data exchange in the agricultural sector.Project summaryWithin the knowledge-based bio-economy, information sharing is an important issue. In agri-foodbusiness, this is a complex issue because many aspects and dimensions play a role. An installedbase of information systems lack standardisation, which hampers efficient exchange of information.This leads to inefficient business processes and hampers adoption of new knowledge andtechnology. The exchange of information at whole chain or network level is poorly organised.Although arable and livestock farming have their own specific needs, there are many similarities inthe need for an integrated approach. Spatial data increasingly plays an important role in agriculture.The overall objective of this project is to coordinate and support the setting up of a sustainablenetwork for developing a system for common data exchange in agriculture. This will be achieved by:ï establishing a platform on data exchange in agriculture in the EU;ï developing a reference framework for interoperability of data exchange;ï identifying the main challenges for harmonising data exchange.First, an in-depth analysis and investigation of the state-of-the art in EU member states will be carriedout. A platform is built up that facilitates communication and collaborative working groups, that workon several, representative use cases, guided by an integrative reference framework. The frameworkconsists of a sound architecture and infrastructure based on a business process modeling approachintegrating existing standards and services. The development is done in close interaction withrelevant stakeholders through the platform and international workshops. The results converge into astrategic research agenda that contains a roadmap for future developments.Project consortium:ï Wageningen University & Research Center (LEI, LSR, Alterra) - The Netherlandsï KuratoriumfürTechnikundBauwesen in der Landwirtschaft (KTBL) - Germanyï MTT Agrifood Research - Finlandï Wireless Info (WRLS) - Czech Republicï Institut de l’Elevage (ELEV) - Franceï Institut de RecercaiTecnologiaAgroalimentàries (IRTA) - Spainï Teagasc - Irelandï Universität Rostock-Germanyï ForschungsinstitutfürBiologischenLandbau (FIBL) - Switzerlandï Altavia - Italyï Poznan University of Life Sciences (PULS) - Polandï ACTA Informatique - Franceï Progis software - AustriaMore information:Dr. Sjaak Wolfert (coordinator) e-mail: sjaak.wolfert@wur.nlLEI Wageningen UR phone: +31 317 485 939P.O. Box 35 mobile: +31 624 135 7906700 AA Wageningen www.agriXchange.euThe Netherlands info@agriXchange.eu
  4. 4. Table of ContentsFigures and Tables ...............................................................................................................................5Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................................6Executive Summary ..............................................................................................................................7Synthetic Summary .............................................................................................................................121 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................19 1.1 Background and scope .......................................................................................................19 1.2 Problem ..............................................................................................................................19 1.3 Objectives of study .............................................................................................................20 1.4 Approach and outline..........................................................................................................202 ICT for Agriculture Interoperability ...............................................................................................22 2.1 Data, information and knowledge .......................................................................................22 2.2 Standardisation need for the agriculture sector ..................................................................23 2.3 Interoperability on farm level ..............................................................................................243 Standardisation ............................................................................................................................25 3.1 Current standardisation initiatives ......................................................................................25 3.1.1 ISO .................................................................................................................................25 3.1.2 W3C ...............................................................................................................................25 3.1.3 OASIS ............................................................................................................................25 3.1.4 OGC ...............................................................................................................................25 3.1.5 IEEE ...............................................................................................................................25 3.1.6 VDMA – ISOBUS ...........................................................................................................26 3.1.7 agroXML .........................................................................................................................26 3.1.8 INSPIRE .........................................................................................................................26 3.2 agriXchange results ............................................................................................................26 3.3 Conclusion ..........................................................................................................................274 Overview of past activities............................................................................................................29 4.1 Aforo ...................................................................................................................................29 4.2 Rural Wins ..........................................................................................................................31 4.3 Valencia Declaration...........................................................................................................33 4.4 eRural Brussels conference conclusions............................................................................35 4.5 Prague Declaration .............................................................................................................36 4.6 aBard vision ........................................................................................................................37 4.7 ami@netfood Strategic Research Agenda .........................................................................38 4.8 The vision on the future value chain for 2016 by the Global Commerce Initiative..............39 4.9 Study on Availability of Access to Computer Networks in Rural Areas ..............................40 4.10 The research agenda of the European Platform for Food for Life ......................................41 4.11 Future Farm vision..............................................................................................................41 4.12 The Research Agenda and the Action Plan by the Technology Platform for Organic Food and Farming.....................................................................................................................................47 4.13 The third SCAR Foresight exercise ....................................................................................48 Final SRA 3
  5. 5. 4.14 Cologne declaration............................................................................................................49 4.15 Vision, Strategic Research Agenda and Third Implementation Action Plan (2009) of the European Agriculture Machinery Industry (Subplatform AET of the Technology Platform MANUFUTURE................................................................................................................................51 4.16 ICT Agri Eranet ...................................................................................................................51 4.17 agriXchange analysis of data exchange in agriculture in the EU27 & Switzerland ............53 4.18 Conclusions from the overview of past activities ................................................................565 Future Trends in ICT - Future Internet, Open Data and Open Source ........................................58 5.1 ICT vision of Future Internet ...............................................................................................58 5.1.1 c@r .................................................................................................................................58 5.1.2 COIN IP ..........................................................................................................................59 5.1.3 FI-WARE ........................................................................................................................60 5.1.4 SmartAgriFood ...............................................................................................................61 5.1.5 agINFRA .........................................................................................................................62 5.2 Open Source Software (OSS) ............................................................................................63 5.2.1 Open Data ......................................................................................................................64 5.3 Conclusion from Future Trends ..........................................................................................656 Future challenges for ICT for Agri-food ........................................................................................67 6.1 Why are the challenges important ......................................................................................67 6.2 Political and organisational challenges...............................................................................68 6.3 Technological, innovation and research challenges ...........................................................697 Application Research domain for Agriculture, Food, Rural development and Environment ........718 ICT Technologies for agri-food and rural regions.........................................................................759 SRA for standardisation in agri-food data, information and knowledge .......................................79 9.1 Conclusion from SRA for standardisation...........................................................................8710 Recommendations for long-term agriXchange sustainability..................................................88 10.1 Challenge 1 ........................................................................................................................88 10.2 Challenge 2 ........................................................................................................................89 10.3 Challenge 3 ........................................................................................................................89 10.4 Challenge 4 ........................................................................................................................90 10.5 Challenge 5 ........................................................................................................................90References ..........................................................................................................................................914 Final SRA
  6. 6. Figures and TablesFigure 1 Schema of the challenges that influence the SRA ................................................................14Table 1 Matrix of relation between Challenges and Applications research Domain ...........................15Table 2 Matrix of dependencies between Applications domain and ICT development priorities .......16Figure 2 The Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom hierarchy of Ackoff [3] .......................................22Figure 3 Schematic overview of relationships between farm management and its environment (fromSörensen et al [6]) ...............................................................................................................................24Figure 4 The AFORO road mapping methodology .............................................................................30Figure 5 Framework of the Rural Wins project to describe ICT requirements and issues for rural andmaritime areas. ...................................................................................................................................32Figure 6 Exchange of knowledge’s cross different levels of farm management .................................42Figure 7 C@R Reference architecture ................................................................................................59Figure 8 Future Internet Cloud Layers ................................................................................................60Figure 9 The 5-start deployment scheme for Open Data [65] .............................................................65Figure 10 Two factors that define the long-term sustainability of agriXchange ...................................67Figure 11 Four chains of influence ......................................................................................................68Table 3 Matrix of relation between Challenges and Applications research Domain ...........................72Table 4 Matrix of dependencies between Applications domain and ICT development priorities ........76Table 5 Agri-food standardisation needs on different level of Data-Information-Knowledge hierarchyfor different ICT Research Domains ....................................................................................................80 Final SRA 5
  7. 7. AbbreviationsCAP Common agricultural policyDG Directorate-General of the European CommissionDG REGIO Directorate General for Regional PolicyDigital Agenda A Digital Agenda for EuropeEFITA European Federation for Information Technology in Agriculture, Food and the EnvironmenteRural IP eRural Integrated ProjectFAO Food and Agriculture OrganisationFP7 Seventh Framework ProgrammeFI-PPP Future Internet Public-Private PartnershipGIS Geographic information systemHTTP Hypertext Transfer Protocoli2010 A European Information Society for growth and employmentICT Information and communication technologyINFITA International Network for Information Technology in AgricultureKBBE Knowledge-Based Bio-EconomyLEADER European Community Initiative for assisting rural communities in improving the quality of life and economic prosperity in their local areaPR Public relationsIoT Internet of ThingsIPR Intellectual Property RightsOSGeo Open Source Geospatial FoundationOSI Open Source InitiativeOSS Open Source SoftwareRDF Resource Description FrameworkRFID Radio Frequency Identification RT&DRTD Research and Technology DevelopmentSLA Service Level AgreementSMEs Small and medium-sized enterprisesSWG Special Working GroupsSRA Strategic Research AgendaURI Uniform Resource IdentifierWLAN Wireless local area networkWIMAX Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave AccessWTO World Trade OrganizationXML Extensible Markup Language6 Final SRA
  8. 8. Executive SummaryIn our networked society, standards play an important role. That is especially the case in exchangingdigital data. With “Standards” we refer to the protocols that describe how data (in so called ‘meta-data’) and the data-exchange are defined to make a digital exchange of data between two devices(often computers but also computer-machine interaction) possible. Such standards enableinteroperability of data, information and knowledge between systems – they ensure compatibility.Standards can reduce choice but the big advantage is that they reduce transaction costs to sharedata and promote competition (users can easily change suppliers as they are not ‘locked in’ tocomplete systems). That means they can also support innovation, although the wide use of astandard can also block progress to something better.Standardisation (the process of setting standards) can be a problematic process. Some standardsarise automatically in the market, for instance because somebody introduces an exemplary newproduct that gets a large market share (the PDF format for published documents is an example). Inother cases newcomers to the market have a big incentive to support interoperability to win marketshare (e.g. MS Word supports the use of WordPerfect files). However, often it is not that easy.New products are not always developed with standardisation in mind, which can lead to pathdependency (as is shown in the debate if the QWERTY key pad was and is still optimal). In somecases there have been fierce debates if a certain product standard that wins in the market, is reallyoptimal (e.g. in video recording between the technical advanced BETAMAX and the VHS that couldrecord a full football match). A standard can also lead to a monopolistic position of a product, but alsoa clever use or a lack of standards can lead to unbalanced market situations (Shapiro and Varian,1999)1.Where there is not a guarantee that good standards arise automatically, they have to be created. Asmany benefit from a standard, and a standard has positive externalities, free rider behaviour andunderinvestment is not unthinkable. There is an organisational challenge to create and maintainstandards.Often this challenge is taken up by industry organisations, especially standard setting organisationsthat have clear, open procedures for that activity. For instance, in Dutch agriculture specificorganisations (like AgroConnect) financed by industry membership fees set standards for specificEDI (Electronic Data Interchange) messages in agriculture, after developing with industry partnersand research. In Germany KTBL plays a similar role concerning AgroXML. In food-retail the barcodeis an important standard, originally developed by Albert Heijn (now Ahold) in the 1970s and proposedto colleague-retailers. Currently GS1 maintains such standards. Some standards are set bygovernments, e.g. in the framework of UN/CEFACT. In some cases such standards are regulated tobe obligatory, or are obligatory in data exchange with the government (Blind, 2004)2.agriXchangeIt is against this background that agriXchange established a network of persons and organisations fordeveloping a system for common data exchange in the agricultural sector. This report provides astrategic research agenda (SRA) for future work on data exchange and standards. The objective of1 C. Shapiro and H. Varian: The Art of Standard Wars in: California Management Review, 41-2, 19992 K. Blind: The Economics of Standards: theory, evidence, policy. Edgar Elgar, 2004 Final SRA 7
  9. 9. the SRA is to identify major challenges related to data exchange and the use of standards identifiedmainly in the agriculture sector but also the agri-food industry sector.The development of standards is based on data-models that describe the data that has to beexchange and in a way that ensures the compatibility with the data systems at both ends of thetransfer. agriXchange investigated some cases to build a reference model for the standard settingprocess itself, and implemented a practical model tool (aXTool) in the agriXchange platform tosearch for and develop standards.Future ICT use as demand for standardsTo promote future standard setting in agriculture it is important to have an idea on the future use ofICT. A review of the literature concludes that the deployment of ICT infrastructure for (standardised)data exchange in Europe is progressing very fast. A large part of the population in Europe has thepossibility to access broadband or has permanent access to the Internet (the bandwidth is usuallylower for rural regions than for cities). However the actual use is much lower than the potential, andespecially agriculture and the rural areas are behind in the uptake of this technology. In many casesapplication priorities are the same as 10 years ago. A big problem in going forward is the data,information and knowledge exchange and interoperability. The uptake of new ICT interoperabletechnologies in primary production, which will be accepted by farming sector, is an important part ofour SRA.Our analysis learns that the last decade there is low sustainability of ICT related agri-food researchand little exchange of experiences among projects. Often similar analyses with similar results areprovided, but overall progress is slow. To overcome this problem, it is necessary to support a long-term suitability of ICT research and to support a long-time vision for RTD development in the agri-food sector.We also conclude that better and faster implementation of ICT and related RTD demand moreappropriate business model thinking in addition to the current technical focus. Better and fasterimplementation would also be supported by a strong professional (international) organisation whichunifies different efforts of different ICT research and development groups, but which will be also ableto protect interests of communities. The candidate for such an organisation could be the EuropeanFederation for Information Technology in Agriculture, Food and the Environment (EFITA,) but it willbe necessary to change its organisational structure.It is important to renew dialogues for politicians to focus on ICT for rural regions as part of Horizon2020 activities. It is not only important to support standardisation awareness, but also deployment ofnew solutions necessary for rural regions. Currently, ICT for agri-food is not covered on a large scale.It is It is important to renew dialogues with politicians to focus on ICT for rural regions as part ofHorizon 2020 activities.Due to the global character of agriculture and food production and also because agricultureproduction influences and is influenced by the environment, it is important to improve dialogue andtransfer of ICT knowledge between developed and developing countries.The latest ICT research trends, cover three aspects: Future Internet, Open Source Software andOpen Data. Future Internet (mainly cloud computing) and Open Source Software, show twoimportant developments: • Interoperability and service-oriented architecture, which allows easy replacement of one component or service by another one. This concept is already currently broadly used in geographic information systems.8 Final SRA
  10. 10. • Support for large-scale use of Open Sources by Future Internet. Currently, Open Source generates business for companies which customise solutions into final applications. Such web-based solutions could generate profit for SMEs developers.Open data initiatives and Public Sector Information are also considered important for the agri-foodsector. Until now, mainly farmers have been limited by restricted access to data, information andknowledge. Linked Data introduces new semantic principles into Web resources and could be usefulto the agri-food sector.Beyond future ICT use: research for far-future ICT use.Where the previous section discussed the future ICT use with an eye to the demand for standards,we could even look further ahead by looking to the research priorities in agriculture and ICTresearch. (figure 1)Figure 1 Challenges that affect the SRATechnological, innovation and research challenges are seen in the area of balancing food safety andsecurity, energy production and environmentally and socially sound production; in supporting a betteradoption of agriculture of climatic change challenges, and to make rural regions an attractive place tolive, invest and work, promoting knowledge and innovation for growth and creating more and betterjobs. Supporting the farming community with rural education, training and awareness building in ICTand to build new ICT models for sharing and use of knowledge by the agri-food community and inrural regions in general are challenges clearly linked to ICT.When it comes to research priorities on ICT in agri-food, the following research priorities have beenidentified: • Collaborative environments and trusted sharing of knowledge and supporting innovations in agri-food and rural areas, especially supporting food quality and security. • New (ICT) structures to serve sustainable animal farming, especially regarding animal and human health and animal welfare. • ICT applications for the complete traceability of production, products and services throughout a networked value chain including logistics. • A new generation of applications supporting better and more effective management of sustainable agriculture production and decision making in agriculture ICT applications supporting the management of natural resources. • An ICT application supporting adoption of farming practices adapted to climatic changes. • An ICT application supporting energy efficiency on farm level. • An ICT application supporting rural development and local businesses. • An ICT application for education, training and awareness raising. • ICT applications reducing administrative burdens in rural areas. Final SRA 9
  11. 11. Future standardisation needs: the SRABased on this analysis of future use of ICT in agriculture, we can address the future need forstandardisation. This leads to the following observations on data, information and knowledgestandardisation.Concerning data standardisation, the agri-food community will mainly be the consumer of standardscoming from other domains or activities. For example activities related to Future Internet, where it isthe intention to design low-level standards allowing developers to access data through standardisedAPI. A similar situation, for example, can be found with geospatial data, where access is solvedthrough OGC standards. Also questions like security are mainly solved outside the agri-foodcommunity. It is important to follow such initiatives, and eventually participate in them if progress isnot fast enough or solutions tend not to take agri-food specifics into account. In two specificagricultural areas further development is necessary inside of the agri-food community: o ISOBUS for access to information to agriculture machinery; o Special agriculture sensors or RFID activities.More important seems to be the standardisation efforts at the information level. This focuses onprotocols (Web services), API and data models for exchange of information in different areas such astraceability, precision farming, livestock transport, welfare regulations, subsidies systems (forexample LPIS), weather information, market information, logistic information. It seems that for thecoming years the key focus will be in this area. The work could be partly related to activities such asagroXML.With the expansion of Web-based technologies, more standardisation efforts will be necessary at theknowledge level. Access to knowledge is the goal of many information systems. It is necessary tobuild knowledge based tools, which will help user in orientation and right decision. That could beontologies, RDF schemas for linked open data, thesauri or vocabularies. Such activities alreadyexist, for example under FAO (AgroVoc thesaurus) and different tools of knowledge management.This effort is partly covered by a new project agINFRA.After AgriXchange….In standardisation, it is important to transfer the standard to the community. It is necessary to supportcommunication between researchers, politicians, industry and also final users. It is necessary totransfer all knowledge to the users. It is important that the requirements for standards are notdefined only by the government or by large industry. Standards have to cover needs of users likefarmers and regional and local ICT developers. Involvement of these communities is crucial. At theother side, the food market is international and for example information about food traceability has tobe shared worldwide. It is important in this area to develop and support global standards.It is not realistic to establish a new organization for such standardisation processes, although morecoordination at EU level seems attractive. This is not only a question of financing, but it is also aquestion of building infrastructure, human resources, etc. For this reason, we recommend to handover and continue agriXchange results under the umbrella of an existing organisation. It will increasethe chances for financing of future activities. As an umbrella organisation at EU level, the EuropeanFederation for Information Technology in Agriculture (EFITA) would be most suitable.Currently, ICT for the agri-food sector is not covered by any policies and also there is no directsupport for such activities. The topic is addressed by different Directorate Generals (DGs), but no DGcovers this issue fully. It is important to include these topics as part of the European priorities andalso as part of Horizon 2020. Collaboration between member states could be strengthened by theERAnet ICT-Agri. It is important to have a strong representative community, which will provide the10 Final SRA
  12. 12. necessary lobbying. On the worldwide level, part of these activities is covered by FAO. But there aregaps between FAO and the worldwide community. It is necessary to improve cooperation. TheInternational Network for Information Technology in Agriculture (INFITA) could play an important rolehere.RTD results and results of standardisation have to be transferred into practice to local and regionalusers. In the future, the agINFRA project could be of help. The project has an objective to buildinfrastructure for sharing agriculture information. It is necessary to support open innovation initiativesin rural regions. It would be good to introduce concept of “Smart Rural Regions” similar to SmartCities. Final SRA 11
  13. 13. Synthetic SummaryThe agriXchange Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) goes beyond the general scope of theagriXchange initiative. It is focused not only on standardisation of data exchange but also on thedefinition of research priorities for ICT in the agri-food sector and for future sustainability of ICTagriculture research and standardisation.The document was prepared in two stages. Project team studies and available materials were thebasis for the first stage. The second stage involved community contribution, which comprised thefollowing three ways of updating the document: • Publishing the draft agriXchange SRA on the project agriXchange platform for public discussion. • In situ discussion about the draft agriXchange SRA on SmartAgriMatics 2012 conference in Paris; • Virtual discussion about the draft agriXchange SRA on Linked-In network. The challenges and recommendations were discussed by an international community. A number of comments and contributions came from social networks. In effect, this was the most valuable source of comments.The last update of the document was done on the basis of comments and discussions within theagriXchange team. Those comments led to this final version of the document.The document is divided into ten parts.The first part, the introduction, defines the background and scope, main problems, objectives andapproach and outline for the rest of the document.The second part introduces basic problems of agriculture interoperability, the problems ofmanagement and interoperability of data, information and knowledge in agriculture.The third part gives a short overview of current standardisation initiatives, which are relevant to theproblems of agriXchange. It also describes current agriXchange activities in the area ofstandardisation. The agriXchange work was focused on two topics: • the structure of the framework model serves information on sharing and harmonisation development for data exchange, and • the implementation of the practical model tool (aXTool) in the agriXchange platform to be user-friendly.The fourth part gives an overview of previous activities. We analysed only those projects anddocuments that were focused on a vision of future ICT for agri-food or eventually ICT for ruraldevelopment. The analyses conclude that the progress in the deployment of ICT infrastructure for(standardised) data exchange in Europe is changing very fast and changes from one year to theother. In principle, a large part of the population in Europe has the possibility to access broadbandor has permanent access to the Internet (the bandwidth is usually lower for rural regions than forcities). This potential access to the Internet is not really used: real use of Internet access is lower inrural regions and the uptake of new solutions into practice and also research in agri-food and ruralapplications is slower than the deployment of the general infrastructure. In many cases applicationpriorities are the same as 10 years ago. The big problem is the data, information and knowledgeexchange and interoperability.12 Final SRA
  14. 14. • From the overview we come to the following conclusions, important for building of agriXchange SRA: The uptake of new ICT interoperable technologies in primary production, which will be accepted by farming sector • The analysis of documents from the last decade demonstrates that there is low sustainability of ICT for agri-food research and little exchange of experiences among projects. Often similar analyses with similar results are provided, but overall progress is slow. To overcome this problem, it is necessary to support a long-term suitability of ICT research and to support a long-time vision for RTD development in the agri-food sector. • Better and faster implementation of RTD results of ICT in practice with appropriate business model thinking. • A strong professional (international) organisation which will unify different efforts of different ICT research and development groups, but which will be also able to protect interests of communities. The candidate for such an organisation could be the European Federation for Information Technology in Agriculture, Food and the Environment (EFITA,) but it will be necessary to change its organisational structure. • It is important to renew dialogues for politicians to focus on ICT for rural regions as part of Horizon 2020 activities. It is not only important to support standardisation awareness, but also deployment of new solutions necessary for rural regions. Currently, ICT for agri-food is not covered on a large scale, neither in DG Connect research nor in KBBE calls. • Due to the global character of agriculture and food production and also because agriculture production influences and is influenced by the environment, it is important to improve dialogue and transfer of ICT knowledge between developed and developing countries.Chapter five is focused on the latest ICT research trends, covering three aspects: • Future Internet; • Open Source Software; • Open Data.This chapter discusses the relation between Future Internet (mainly cloud computing) and OpenSource Software, which could be in some way considered as competitive approaches, but at thesame time they could be in synergy. There are two important aspects: 1. Interoperability and service-oriented architecture, which allows easy replacement of one component or service by another one. This concept is already currently broadly used in geographic information systems. 2. Support for large-scale use of Open Sources by Future Internet. Currently, Open Source generates business for companies which customise solutions into final applications. Such web-based solutions could generate profit for SMEs developers.The last part of the analysis is focused on Open Data and Linked Data. Open data initiatives andPublic Sector Information are also considered important for the agri-food sector. Until now, mainlyfarmers have been limited by restricted access to data, information and knowledge. Linked Dataintroduces new semantic principles into Web resources and could be useful to the agri-food sector.Chapters 2 to 5 are mainly analytical: the focus of these chapters was on collecting and analysis ofavailable resources. The next chapters are synthetic, focused on building a new vision.Chapter 6 is focused on future challenges. There are two types of challenges • Political-organisational challenges • Technological, innovation and research challenges Final SRA 13
  15. 15. The following flow chart explains how both types of challenges affect the SRA (Figure 2)Figure 2 Challenges that affect the SRAThe following political and organisational challenges have been definedThe analysis in Chapter 4 in particular helps define the next political and organisational challenges • To improve the representation of ICT agriculture specialists and users in European activities • To include ICT and knowledge management for agri-food and rural communities generally as a vital part of the ICT policies and initiatives • To support a better transfer of RTD results and innovation to the everyday life of farmers, food industry and other rural communities • To accelerate bottom-up activities as a driver for local and regional development • To support discussion and transfer of knowledge between developed and developing countriesAnd the following technological, innovation and research challenges • To find a better balance between food safety and security, energy production and environmentally and socially sound production • To support better adoption of agriculture on climatic changes • To make rural regions an attractive place to live, invest and work, promoting knowledge and innovation for growth and creating more and better jobs • To support the farming community and rural education, training and awareness building in ICT • To build new ICT models for sharing and use of knowledge by the agri-food community and in rural regions in general.Chapter 7 defines the following research priorities for the Applications domain: • Collaborative environments and trusted sharing of knowledge and supporting innovations in agri-food and rural areas, especially supporting food quality and security. • New (ICT) structures to serve sustainable animal farming, especially regarding animal and human health and animal welfare. • ICT applications for the complete traceability of production, products and services throughout a networked value chain including logistics.14 Final SRA
  16. 16. • A new generation of applications supporting better and more effective management of sustainable agriculture production and decision making in agriculture ICT applications supporting the management of natural resources. • An ICT application supporting adoption of farming practices adapted to climatic changes. • An ICT application supporting energy efficiency on farm level. • An ICT application supporting rural development and local businesses. • An ICT application for education, training and awareness raising. • ICT applications reducing administrative burdens in rural areas.Table 1 shows relation of these research priorities with the challenges.The development of knowledge-based systems for the farming sector has to be supported by ICTfocusing on the areas as defined in:Table 1 Relation matrix between Challenges and Applications research Domain(Green indicates that some applications are the answer to a concrete challenge)Chapter 8 defines priorities for ICT research domains. This list of domains was defined based on theneeds from application areas, but also based on the analysis of results from chapters 2, 3, 4 and 5.The future development has to be supported by ICT focusing on: • Future Internet and Internet-based applications such as sensor technology, cloud computing and machine-to-machine communication. • Mobile applications. • Improving of positioning systems. • Service Oriented Architecture. • Methods of knowledge management. • Semantic models, multilingualism, vocabularies and automatic translation. • New Earth observation methods. • Management and accessibility of geospatial information. • Open data access. • Open Source development. • New modelling. • The power of social networks and social media. Final SRA 15
  17. 17. • New e-educational and training methods.The relation between agri-food related applications and ICT research topics is described in Table 2.Table 2 Dependency matrix between Applications domain and ICT development priorities(The violet colour indicates that for a concrete application a specific technology is required) Future Internet Mobile Improving of Service Methods of Semantic New earth Management Open data Open Source New modelling The power of New e- and Internet of applications positioning Oriented knowledge models, observation and access. development methods social networks educational Things systems. Architecture management multilingualism, methods accessibility of and social methods. Application Research domain including vocabularies geospatial media sensor and automatic information technology, translation cloud computing and machine to machine communication ICT Research domain Collaborative environments and trusted sharing of knowledge and supporting innovations in agri-food and rural areas, especially supporting food quality and security New (ICT) structures to serve sustainable animal farming, especially regarding animal and human health and animal welfare ICT applications for the complete traceability of production, products and services throughout a networked value chain including logistics supporting better and more effective management of sustainable agriculture production and decision making in agriculture ICT applications supporting the management of natural ICT application supporting adoption of farming practices adapted to climatic changes ICT application supporting energy efficiency on farm level ICT application supporting rural development and local businesses ICT application for education, training and awareness rising ICT applications reducing administrative burdens in rural areasChapter nine provides recommendations for a necessary future standardisation effort related to ICTand agriculture applications priorities. The provided analysis stresses the following important facts: • On the level of data standardisation, the agri-food community will mainly be the consumer of standards coming from other domains or activities. For example activities related to Future Internet, where it is the intention to design low-level standards allowing developers to access data through standardised API. A similar situation, for example, can be found with geospatial data, where access is solved through OGC standards. Also questions like security are mainly solved outside of the agri-food community. It is important to follow this initiative, and eventually participate in other initiatives including the SmartAgrifood project in Future Internet. There are two areas where further development is necessary inside of the community: o ISOBUS for access to information to agriculture machinery; o Special agriculture sensors or RFID activities. • More important seems to be the effort on an information level. In accordance with work which was provided in WP4, it is necessary to be focused on protocols (Web services), API and data models for exchange of information in different areas such as traceability, precision farming, live transport, welfare regulations, subsidies systems (for example LPIS), weather information, market information, logistic information. It seems that for the next period the key focus will be in this area. The work could be partly related to activities such as agroXML. • In the future with the expansion of Web-based technologies, more effort will be necessary in the area of knowledge level. Access to knowledge is the goal of many information systems. It is necessary to build knowledge based tools, which will help user in orientation and right16 Final SRA
  18. 18. decision. It could be ontologies, RDF schemas for open linked data, thesaurus or vocabularies. Such activities already exist, for example under FAO (AgroVoc thesaurus) and different tools of knowledge management. This effort is partly covered by the new project agINFRA.Chapter 10 defines long-term strategic goals for sustainability of agriXchange. This strategy followsthe political organisational challenges defined in Chapter 6 for the following reasons: • In any area there are two types of standardisation efforts: o Community or industry driven effort. For these it is necessary to have structure inside the community, which will take leadership in this area. o Politically driven standardisation – in the agri-food area it could include standards for animals welfare, food security etc. For implementation in practice, it is necessary to support related policy. Also, it is good for policy makers to have partners on the community level. • For any standard it is important to transfer it to the community. It is necessary to support communication between researchers, politicians, industry and also final users. It is necessary to transfer all knowledge to the users. • It is important that the requirements for standards are not defined only by politicians or by large industry. Standards have to cover needs of users like farmers and regional and local IST developers. Involvement of these communities is crucial. • The food market is international and for example information about food traceability has to be shared worldwide. It is important in this area to support standards worldwide.As a reaction on single challenges there are the following recommendations: • It is necessary to have a better coordination of different activities related to ICT for agriculture, but also related to standardisation. On the basis of the performed analysis, it seems not realistic to establish a new platform initiative. It is not only a question of financing, but it is also a question of building infrastructure, human resources, etc. For this reason, the project team recommends to move agriXchange under the umbrella of an existing organisation. It will increase the chances for financing of future activities. As an umbrella organisation, the European Federation for Information Technology in Agriculture (EFITA) would be most suitable. The advantage to have a European body, representing the ICT Agri- food sector, which could be an interesting partner for the European Commission and other policy actors.., in particular for Initiatives such as the European Innovation Partnership. • Currently ICT for agri-food sector is not covered by any policies and also there is no direct support for such activities. The topic is addressed by different Directorate Generals (DGs), but no DG covers this issue fully. It is important to include these topics as part of the European priorities and also as part of Horizon 2020. From this reason, it is important to have strong representative of a community, which will provide the necessary lobbing. On the worldwide level, part of these activities is covered by FAO. But there are gaps between FAO and the worldwide community. It is necessary to improve cooperation. • Any RTD results and also results of standardisation have to be transferred into practice to local and regional users. In the future, the agINFRA project could be of help. The project has an objective to build infrastructure for sharing agriculture information. • It is necessary to support open innovation initiatives in rural regions. It will be good to introduce concept of “Smart Rural Regions” similar to Smart Cities. Final SRA 17
  19. 19. • It is necessary to support standardisation cooperation also worldwide. FAO or the International Network for Information Technology in Agriculture (INFITA) could play an important role.18 Final SRA
  20. 20. 1 Introduction1.1 Background and scopeThe objective of this report is to provide a Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) which reflects thebusiness demands for use of ICT and exchange of agriculture data, information and knowledgesupported by current standardisation, but also by future research in ICT for the agri-food industry. Itreflects the needs of the agriculture business. The focus of the SRA is on identifying major ICTchallenges related to the use of ICT and data, information, knowledge and standards in agricultureand the agri-food industry sector. The agenda defines not only the necessary ICT standards, but alsoin a broader view the Research and Technology Development (RTD) areas which will be selected askey priorities to achieve the challenges identified. The wide deployment of data, information andknowledge management, which will include ICT technologies, data, information and standards,exchange of information and use of ICT standards specifically oriented to the agri-food industry, willsupport the transformation of agriculture production into a competitive, sustainable and dynamicKnowledge-Based Bio-Economy (KBBE) as well as facilitate the participation and ultimately thecomplete integration of agricultural production into the Knowledge Society. The SRA is mainlyfocused on the KBBE and ICT programmes within the EU FP7 Research Programme, but it is basedon activities on a regional and cross-regional level as well as within other EU programmes andinitiatives. It is critical to follow the main trends, but also to cooperate with the main industry and ICTplayers involved. The definition of the SRA required a deep knowledge of problems of agriculturedata, information and knowledge interoperability, previous activities, existing standardisationproblems, the state of the art in the agri-food ICT area, but also consultations with representativesfrom industry, governments, agencies, operators, and agri-food authorities and stakeholders involvedin rural development. The discussions with stakeholders during events such as the GeoFARMaticsconference in Cologne in 2010 or the EFITA congress in Prague 2011 played an important role. Thefirst version of the SRA was published in May 2012. The current document is presenting the finalversion of strategic lines that, after validation of the draft version (mainly provided based on theSmart AgriMatics conference and the Linked-In social network), will support all domain stakeholdersin the process of implementing a number of specific measures to achieve the stated objectives. Thisdocument is the final version, but it is still open for comments. The goal of this SAR is to stimulatefuture discussions. For this reason, the document is published under the Common Creative Licenseto support its re-use and further exploitation of the collected ideas. The objective of the document isto stimulate discussion. ICT in agriculture is a very dynamic sector and it requires the continualupdating of ideas. On the other hand, the analysis of previous activities demonstrates that there is aneed for a long-time sustainability of ICT for agri-food research (many previous SRAs and otherstrategic documents dispersed without any continuity and also accessibility of previous documents).1.2 ProblemThe agriculture sector is a unique sector due to its strategic importance for both European citizens(consumers) and the European economy (regional and global), which, ideally, should make thewhole sector a network of interacting organisations. Rural areas are of particular importance withrespect to the agri-food sector and should be specifically addressed within this scope. There is anincreasing tension that has not been experienced in any other sector between the requirements to Final SRA 19
  21. 21. ensure full food safety as well as sustainability while keeping costs under control. Also it is necessaryto ensure the long-term strategic interests of Europe and worldwide [1], also with regard to foodsecurity and global challenges. To solve the problems of future farming, we need to develop a newgeneration of knowledge management, which will help the agri-food sector to adopt to a changingworld. The objective of future knowledge management is to help the agri-food sector to becompetitive in the market in the sense of required products, quality and amount, to be able to react tochanges in the world market, changes in subsidies systems, requirements for environmentprotection, but also to be able to react for example to increasing costs of inputs or to climatechanges. The future knowledge management systems have to support not only direct profitability ofthe agri-food sector or environment protection, but also activities of individuals and groups, allowingeffective collaboration among groups in the agri-food industry and consumers and widercommunities, especially in the rural domain. Having these considerations in mind, the proposedvision lays the foundation for meeting ambitious but achievable operational objectives that in the longrun will definitively contribute to fulfil identified needs. The knowledge management represents theon-going relationship between people, processes and technology systems involved in designing,capturing and implementing the intellectual infrastructure of an organisation. It encompasses thenecessary changes in management attitudes, organisational behaviour and policy. Knowledgemanagement should create a value for the customer and increase the profitability of farms. It is clearfrom the definition that knowledge management goes one step further than the simple concept ofinformation systems and data exchange and entails other two factors, people and processes [2]. Thiswill require better exchange of information, but also the adoption of new scientific and researchresults in the agri-food sector.The discussions on social networks demonstrate the growing importance of bottom-up activities,collaboration and social media. Open innovation and open data access are important for future ruraldevelopment. Such activities as Living Labs could help rural regions in future. For the urbanpopulation there is a growing activity called Smart Cities. It is important to support similar activities forrural regions - Smart Rural Regions.1.3 Objectives of studyThe objective of the SRA is to identify major challenges related to the use of standards identified inagriculture and agri-food industry sector. The agenda defines Research and TechnologyDevelopment areas which will be selected as key priorities to achieve the challenges identified. Thefuture wide deployment and use of standards, which will be specifically oriented to the agri-foodindustry, will support the transformation of agriculture production into competitive and dynamicknowledge-based economy, as well as facilitating the participation and ultimately the completeintegration of the EU agriculture production into the Knowledge Society. The SRA is mainly focusedon KBBE and ICT within FP7 and Horizon2020, but also on sets of activities on a regional andcross.-regional level as well as within other EU programmes and initiatives.The second objective is to recommend a way for the long-term sustainability of the agriXchangeinitiative.1.4 Approach and outlineThe SRA is not built from scratch. There are two main sources of ideas that are used and extendedin the agriXchange SRA. The first source are the results of previous activities. There were manyactivities trying to define the future vision or the ICT and knowledge management in agriculture andin a broader sense also in rural development. In many cases the project results disappeared together20 Final SRA
  22. 22. with the project itself. The first part of our work was a deep analysis of previous work and to see whatwas done, what was already overcome and what has been valid until now.The second information sources were the results from WP2, WP3 and WP4 of agriXchange. Theanalyses are used as an input and recommendation for the SRA. As was already stressed, the SRAnot only focuses on the standardisation process but also on defining priorities for future research.This is done because future research priorities will define necessary standardisation tasks in ICT forthe agri-food sector.A part of the recommendation is also a suggestion for the long-term sustainability of the agriXchangeinitiative. The report is outlined as follows: • Chapter 2 gives an introduction to the problem of standardisation of ICT in agriculture • Chapter 3 gives a short overview of current standardisation initiatives relevant to agriXchange • Chapter 4 analyses previous projects and results of other WPs of agriXchange. • Chapter 5 focuses on current ICT trends and their potential implementation in the agri-food sector • Chapter 6 defines future research and political challenges for ICT in agri-food sector. • Chapter 7 focuses on defining future research priorities in ICT applications for agri-food sector. • Chapter 8 defines ICT research priorities given by needs of applications. • Chapter 9 answers the question how research priorities in ICT for agriculture will generate new requirements for standardisation. • Chapter 10 focuses on agriXchange long-term sustainability and on the definition of political priorities for the next period.The final version was prepared on the basis of discussions about the draft SRA during the AgriMatics2012 conference in Paris and by mainly using moderated discussions on Linked-In and commentsfrom the project partners. The results of all the discussions were used for finalising the SRA. Final SRA 21
  23. 23. 2 ICT for Agriculture Interoperability2.1 Data, information and knowledgeFor every discussion about knowledge or information management it is important to betterunderstand basic terms such as data, information and knowledge. It is also important to understandthe problems of interoperability and standardisation. For a better explanation we will use the Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom hierarchy (Figure 3). • Data: as symbols; • Information: data that are processed to be useful; provides answers to "who", "what", "where", and "when" questions; • Knowledge: application of data and information; answers "how" questions; • Wisdom: evaluated understanding.Figure 3 The Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom hierarchy of Ackoff [3]A further elaboration of Ackoffs definitions follows: • Data... data is raw. It simply exists and has no significance beyond its existence (in and of itself). It can exist in any form, usable or not. It does not have meaning of itself. In computer parlance, a spreadsheet generally starts out by holding data • Information... information is data that has been given meaning by way of relational connection. This "meaning" can be useful, but does not have to be. In computer parlance, a relational database makes information from the data stored within it. • Knowledge... knowledge is the appropriate collection of information, such that its intent is to be useful. Knowledge is a deterministic process. • Wisdom... wisdom is an extrapolative and non-deterministic, non-probabilistic process. It calls upon all the previous levels of consciousness, and specifically upon special types of human programming (moral, ethical codes, etc.). It beckons to give us understanding about which there has previously been no understanding, and in doing so, goes far beyond understanding itself. It is the essence of philosophical probing.” [4]For the future analysis of agriXchange, important are the first three terms data, information andknowledge, which define three levels related to the management of farms. The wisdom could beunderstood as part of decision processes.22 Final SRA
  24. 24. We have defined three levels of management: • Data Management; • Information Management; • Knowledge management.Data management includes • Data governance; • Data Architecture, Analysis and Design; • Database Management; • Data Security Management; • Data Quality Management; • Metadata Management; • Document, Record and Content Management; • Reference and Master Data Management.Information management includes • Records management; • Can be stored, catalogued, organised; • Align with corporate goals and strategies; • Set up a database; • Use for day-to-day optimum decision-making; • Aims for efficiency; • Data with a purpose.Knowledge management includes • A framework for designing an organisation’s goals, structures, and processes to add value; • Collect, disseminate, use of information; • Align with corporate goals and strategies; • Focus on cultivating, sharing, and strategising; • Connecting people to gain a competitive advantage; • Information with a purpose.It is clear that we have to look at the problem of agriculture standardisation from different angles. It isevident that the focus on standardisation only on data level is too narrow and will not be able to coverthe needs of the agri-food sector. In the future, the main effort has to be on the level ofstandardisation of information and knowledge.2.2 Standardisation need for the agriculture sectorFuture Farm deliverable 3.1[5] says that a farmer needs to manage a lot of information to makeeconomically and environmentally sound decisions. Such a process is very labour intensive becausemost parts have to be executed manually. The farm activities include the monitoring field operations,managing the finances and applying for subsidies, depending on different software applications.Farmers need to use different tools to manage monitoring and data acquisition onǦline in the field.They need to analyse information related to subsidies, and to communicate with tax offices, productresellers etc. These needs are portrayed in Figure 4. Final SRA 23
  25. 25. Figure 4 Relationship between farm management and its environment (from Sörensen et al. [6])Any decision on farm level requires intensive data, information and knowledge flows. It requiresmany different tools. Interoperability plays an important role.2.3 Interoperability on farm levelEffective use of ICT management tools, decision support, accounting systems, tools for precisionfarming etc. require intensive sharing of all: • Data – for example from machinery, loggers etc.; • Information – exchange of information with public bodies, consumers etc.; • Knowledge – it is important for farm management systems to be able to understand the content of information from different external resources.Interoperability on the farm level cannot be reduced to simple data structures and protocols, but thathas to be fully understood. Agriculture standardisation is a broad subject that overlaps different otherstandardisation efforts. The task for the agriXchange initiative is to decide where to share standardsfrom other initiatives and where to focus the effort of our own standardisation activities.For standardisation, it is important to know what we have to standardise and why. We need toanalyse the main challenges of ICT for agriculture. These challenges will be used later on to definewhat we have to standardise. It is also important to follow the main research trends, because in somecases future technologies could overcome some standardisation problems.24 Final SRA
  26. 26. 3 StandardisationThis chapter gives a brief overview of existing standardisation efforts that are important foragriXchange. It also describes the results from WP4.3.1 Current standardisation initiatives3.1.1 ISOISO is the International Organization for Standardization, which develops and publishes internationalstandards. ISO standards ensure that products and services are safe, reliable and of good quality.For businesses, they are strategic tools that reduce costs by minimising waste and errors andincreasing productivity. They help companies to access new markets, level the playing field fordeveloping countries and facilitate free and fair global trade. [7]3.1.2 W3CThe World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an international community where member organisations,a full-time staff, and the public work together to develop Web standards. The W3C mission is to leadthe World Wide Web to its full potential by developing protocols and guidelines that ensure the long-term growth of the Web. Below we discuss important aspects of this mission, all of which furtherW3Cs vision of One Web. [8]3.1.3 OASISOASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards) is a not-for-profitconsortium that drives the development, convergence and adoption of open standards for the globalinformation society. OASIS promotes industry consensus and produces worldwide standards forsecurity, Cloud computing, SOA, Web services, the Smart Grid, electronic publishing, emergencymanagement, and other areas. OASIS open standards offer the potential to lower costs, stimulateinnovation, grow global markets, and protect the right of free choice of technology. [9]3.1.4 OGCThe Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) is an international industry consortium of 478 companies,government agencies and universities participating in a consensus process to develop publiclyavailable interface standards. OGC® Standards support interoperable solutions that "geo-enable" theWeb, wireless and location-based services and mainstream IT. The standards empower technologydevelopers to make complex spatial information and services accessible and useful with all kinds ofapplications. [10]3.1.5 IEEEIEEE is the worlds largest professional association dedicated to advancing technological innovationand excellence for the benefit of humanity. IEEE and its members inspire a global communitythrough IEEEs highly cited publications, conferences, technology standards, and professional andeducational activities. IEEE, pronounced "Eye-triple-E," stands for the Institute of Electrical andElectronics Engineers. The association is chartered under this name and it is the full legal name. [11] Final SRA 25
  27. 27. 3.1.6 VDMA – ISOBUSISOBUS is managed by the ISOBUS group in VDMA. The VDMA (VerbandDeutscherMaschinen-und Anlagenbau - German Engineering Federation) is a network of around 3,000 engineeringindustry companies in Europe and 400 industry experts.The ISOBUS standard specifies a serial data network for control and communications on forestry oragricultural tractors. It consists of several parts: General standard for mobile data communication,Physical layer, Data link layer, Network layer, Network management, Virtual terminal, Implementmessages applications layer, Power train messages, Tractor ECU, Task controller and managementinformation system data interchange, Mobile data element dictionary, Diagnostic, File Server. Thework for further parts is ongoing. It is currently ISO standard ISO 11783. [12]3.1.7 agroXMLagroXML is a standard facilitating data exchange in agriculture and other sectors in contact withagriculture. agroXML is developed by the KTBL and partners among makers of agricultural softwaresystems, machinery companies and service providers. agroXML is based on the internationallystandardised eXtensible Markup Language (XML). It consists of schemas complemented by contentlists. The schema is designed in a modular way. The English language is used for data type andelement names and the documentation. Essential modules with definitions concerning the farm andplant production are currently available, modules for livestock farming are in development. [13]3.1.8 INSPIREIn Europe a major recent development has been the entering in force of the INSPIRE Directive inMay 2007, establishing an infrastructure for spatial information in Europe to support Communityenvironmental policies, and policies or activities which may have an impact on the environment.INSPIRE is based on the infrastructures for spatial information established and operated by the 27Member States of the European Union. The Directive addresses 34 spatial data themes needed forenvironmental applications, with key components specified through technical implementing rules.This makes INSPIRE a unique example of a legislative “regional” approach. [14]3.2 agriXchange resultsA part of the agriXchange work in WP4 agriXchange team focused on the basic design of the genericintegration framework for data, information and knowledge exchange harmonisation andinteroperability based on selected use cases. The project worked with two levels of use casedescriptions. • The first is a “wide scope” use case description, covering a whole domain-specific procedure fulfilling the user needs, for example fertilising procedures from planning to execution, consisting of a chain of processes, actors and data-exchange transactions. • The “narrow scope” description serves as a meta-data model of the interface, where the context of the data transaction of that specific interface is briefly described.The agriXchange WP4 effort focused on two aspects: • the structure of the framework model serves information sharing and harmonisation development of the data exchange, and • the implementation of the practical model tool (aXTool) in the agriXchange platform has to be user-friendly.26 Final SRA
  28. 28. The agriXchange Reference Framework design contains functionalities such as search, contribute,discussion and evaluation by user experience, and also a mechanism for quality management. Thedesign serves different interest groups with their focus on either wide-scope use cases or narrow-scoped interface solutions, and assists in interactions between the scopes [15].From the user point of view, the agriXchange Reference Framework should serve four mainfunctions: searching for existing solutions interlinked with any open (standardised) interface,contributing (to) existing solutions, discussion and evaluation of solutions. The Reference Frameworktool should provide information in details that suit user’s demand in different phases of a systemdevelopment process.Classification of contributed information according to the agriXchange Reference Information Model(aXRIM) is a backbone for the generic integration framework and provides the foundation for therelevant functionalities of the aXTool, like relevant and efficient search functions. The main classes ofaXRIM are Process, Actors, Communication protocol and Data. The aXRIM includes elements whichconcern Technical architecture and Technical communication infrastructure (Class: Communicationprotocol) and Organisational embedding (Class: Actors).Users can be classified as developers, modellers and business users depending on the scope oftheir interest. The users can represent specific groups of narrow interest areas or wider themes.When contributing, users follow a certain work flow through which the aXTool gives guidance. Thequality maintenance requires the contributors to identify their name, the organisation and communitythey represent, and the contact information. Also, collected user experiences of already existingsolutions that are also shared by other contributors, are utilised to describe the quality of a certainsolution [16].Wide-scope use case descriptions serve the development and optimisation of farming, food logisticsand trading systems which capture several sub-systems, actors and stakeholders. Narrow-scopeinterfaces focus on single data exchange interfaces and actors and processes around them, and thelevel of information detail is higher, including technical details, standards and other implementationinstructions. For this level, one of the key factors in data exchange is the sharing of vocabularies. Inmany cases, each data exchange solution has its own specific vocabulary. To increase costefficiency in constructing an interoperable system, the harmonising of vocabularies is essential. Theaim of the information modelling of the two use cases is to give a high-level understanding of thecontent of the information to be exchanged between the parties or actors involved. Gathering thedata content from different use cases to the agriXchange collection gives a good ground for furtheranalysis and harmonisation of the vocabulary in the agri-food sector [17].3.3 ConclusionAlmost all of the described standardisation efforts have some effect on the agri-food sector. Initiativessuch as ISOBUS or agroXML could in future be interconnected with agriXchange initiatives in someway; the agriXchange community could contribute to some standardisation efforts with requirementsdirectly from agri-food community and some standards will be simply adopted by the community.From the work in WP4 it is clear that an important part of future standardisation efforts will be relatedto concrete processes, decision making, etc. Standardisation on the level of data exchange isrequired (ISOBUS, IEEE standardisation in sensors communication protocols, etc.), but increasinglyalso on the level of information exchange and in future also on the level of knowledge (for examplesemantic). Final SRA 27
  29. 29. Another important aspect is that current standardisation initiatives are publicly driven or driven bylarge industries (W3C, OGC, OASIS). For ICT in the agri-food sector it is important to support theparticipation of Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in standardisation processes or minimallysupport free access of SMEs to existing standards. The participation of SMEs in the development ofagri-food applications is very high, but the participation of SMEs in standardisation initiatives is verylow (SMEs have no capacity to participate in these activities and to contribute to standards). Thiscould lead to situations where current standards do not fit the needs of agri-food ICT well. It isnecessary to find the way (granting, networking activities) to support participation of SMEs instandardisation activities.28 Final SRA
  30. 30. 4 Overview of past activitiesICT for agriculture, food, environment and rural development is not a new issue. There were manyactivities and initiatives during the last years. New research projects very often start from scratchwithout taking into account results from previous activities. Therefore, we decided to include thischapter to show some project results performed mainly during the first decade of the 21st century.We expect this chapter can provide a good overview of how ideas have changed, what was reachedand where progress can be shown. It is based on an analysis of supporting and coordination actionsand key declarations with a focus on future strategies in the area of ICT for agriculture, food, ruraldevelopment and environment. This analysis includes a short overview of the results orrecommendations from the projects and studies and a list of previous declarations: To complete thisstudy, part of the analysis is taken from WP2 [18] • Aforo Roadmap • Rural Wins Recommendation • Valencia Declaration • eRural Brussels conference conclusions • Prague Declaration • aBard vision • ami@netfood Strategic Research Agenda • The vision on the future value chain for 2016 by the Global Commerce Initiative • Study on Availability of Access to Computer Networks in Rural Areas • The research agenda of the European Platform for Food for Life • Future Farms recommendations • The Research Agenda and the Action Plan by the Technology Platform for Organic Food and Farming • The third SCAR Foresight exercise • Cologne Declaration supported by agriXchange • Vision, Strategic Research Agenda and Third Implementation Action Plan (2009) of the European Agriculture Machinery Industry (Subplatform AET of the Technology Platform MANUFUTURE • ICT Agri Eranet • agriXchange analysis of data exchange in agriculture in the EU27 & SwitzerlandThis chapter is prepared as an overview and a review of existing outputs and publications from theabove mentioned projects.4.1 AforoThe objective of the AFORO [19] project (running in 2002 and 2003) was to provide a vision andwork plan to implement future RTD trends for the transformation of agri-food industries into digitalenterprises. The AFORO consortium split the agri-food domain into several more "manageable"sectors. Each of them had its own roadmap. The selected sectors were:(a) primary sources, Final SRA 29
  31. 31. (b) processed food products,(c) beverages(d) additives, conservatives & flavours.For every sector the main objectives were: • to define business needs, • to identify the main constraints to be taken into account, • to define a technology independent roadmap based on business demands.The AFORO methodology defined an approach to how the business needs of the agri-food domaincan be established in an ordered way. The process was divided into the following steps: • data gathering, • ascertaining of current and future objectives, • analysis of these objectives, • listing of key drivers [19]. Knowledge Acquisition: Structured questionnaires, checklists and benchmarks … Knowledge Acquisition: Structured questionnaires, checklists and benchmarks … (A) AS--IS Situation (B) To--Be Situation - (A)AS- -ISState (A)PresentISSituation AS- Situation AS-IS Situation (A)AS -StateSituation AS- Situation AS-IS Situation AS PresentIs Situation AS-IS As- As (B)To -Be Situation (B)DesiredBeSituation To- To-Be Situation (B)To -BeSituation To- Vision To-Be Situation To To- To-Be Situation To (B)DesiredVision (A)PresentState As-Is Present State Present State Present Present State State To-Be Situation Desired Vision Desired Vision Desired Vision Desired Vision Desired Vision Present State Desired Vision Meta Model Analysis of A & B to locate position on a continuum … 3DVW A B )XWXUH C Perform Risk Analysis to select Optimal path from A to B and towards C Requirements Analysis Requirements Analysis Project Planning Project Planning Design and Development Design and Development )HHGEDFN Implementation Implementation Test & Evaluate Test & Evaluate © CIMRU, 2002Figure 5 The AFORO road mapping methodologyThe AFORO project defined a roadmapping methodology based on the description of the situation Asis and defining the strategic vision To be (see Figure 5). The important output from the AFOROroadmap is a consensus of business needs. The following business needs were recognised byAFORO [20]. • To support food traceability and safety over the whole European market chain. • To implement interoperability technologies enabling networked organisations and forming a Single Food European Market.30 Final SRA
  32. 32. • To develop market knowledge supporting innovative value added products, processes and business strategies. • To design and develop interoperability tools for European logistic and services. • To design a European Agri-food Information System including materials, technologies, and results of RTD activities. • To support the transformation of agri-food business into an effective collaborative organisation.For every issue the situation As is was analysed and the roadmap To be was defined. For detailedrecommendations, see [20].4.2 Rural WinsThe objective of Rural Wins [21] (2002 – 2003) was to build a strategic RTD roadmap developing aninformation and communications technologies’ vision to ensure the economically and technicallyfeasible deployment of information and communication solutions for rural areas including alsomaritime regions and islands.The project provided an analysis of: • the trends in technology development, • the needed equipment, • the deployment of services.Different scenarios of joint public and private initiatives and business models were analysed toreduce the discriminatory gap that nowadays exists between rural and urban areas with regard tobroadband accessibility and applications’ deployment. Rural Wins use the following classification ofrural areas (based on typology of DG Region) 1. Integrated rural areas - territories with a growing population, an employment basis in the secondary and tertiary sectors, but with farming remaining an important land use. The environmental, social and cultural heritage of some of these areas, relatively close to big cities, may be under pressure of "urbanisation". The rural character of some of these areas is at risk of becoming predominantly suburban. 2. Intermediate rural areas - relatively distant from urban centres, with a mixture of primary and secondary sectors; in many countries larger scale farming operations can be found. 3. Remote rural areas - areas with the lowest population densities, the lowest incomes and an older population. These areas depend heavily on agricultural or fishing employment and generally provide the least adequate basic servicesFor all three types of rural areas, the barriers that need to be addressed by Broadband ICTs areidentified as: • Distance barriers - access to administrative and governmental services and structures (taxes, subsidies etc.). • Economic barriers - access to wider business and labour markets (suppliers, customers, opportunities). • Social barriers of rural inhabitants to information, education & training facilities, health, social services etc. Final SRA 31
  33. 33. • Information barriers – currently the amenities of many rural areas are "invisible" to the "outside world" (inhabitants of other areas, urban centres or citizens of other states - rural tourism, local products etc.).Based on the analysis of socio-economic and technology trends, the project concluded that for RuralBroadband access the following is needed: • Public/Private Partnerships; • New access technologies.The project developed a strategic roadmap template that provides a simple, coherent and completeframework to describe the ICT requirements and issues for rural and maritime areas (Figure 6). $ZDUHQHVV 9LVLRQ 3ROLF 7HFK 6HU QRORJ YLFHVFigure 6 Framework of the Rural Wins project to describe ICT requirements and issues for ruraland maritime areas.The framework consists of 4 dimensions: 1. Vision/Policy, 2. Awareness, 3. Technology/Infrastructure 4. Services/ApplicationsThese were identified for each of the Rural Wins’ (a) Integrated, (b) Intermediate (c) Remote typesof rural and maritime areas.Using this framework, the following concrete scenarios are identified for each type of rural area: • Integrated areas o ICT needs – similar to urban; o Recommended – “standard” fibre/wired/mobile/WLAN; o Objectives – full parity and use with urban areas;32 Final SRA
  34. 34. o Implementation – commercial; • Intermediate areas o ICT needs – distributed “economies of scope”; o Recommended – some fibre/wire/mobile/WLAN to towns, satellite/WLAN elsewhere; o Objectives – competitive SMEs access by all to all services; o Implementation – public/private partnerships; • Remote areas o ICT needs – part of regional economic, social cultural development; o Recommended – satellite/WLAN - new access approaches are required; o Objectives – ubiquitous fixed mobile services to overcome barriers; o Implementation – public funding, public/private community partnerships.The use of bi-directional broadband satellite links and local/community owned and operated wirelessLANS (particularly Meshs of Wi-Fi (802.11a/b) wireless cells) are identified as being particularlyrelevant eRural access technologies for remote rural areas.Rural Wins promotes “eRural” policy. The eRural Integrated project (eRural IP) has to adopt anintegrated and multidisciplinary approach across the whole value chain from technology to servicesand awareness that will cover all RTD to eliminate the Urban/Rural Digital Divide. [22]4.3 Valencia DeclarationThe Valencia Declaration was the output of the European Conference “Information Society as KeyEnabler for Rural Development” organised in Valencia, on 3 and 4 February 2003. The ValenciaDeclaration addressed the following issues [23]: • INFRASTRUCTURES AND SERVICES - telecommunications infrastructures must provide the same level of information transmission and of technology and knowledge transfer. Due to low population density and weak economic activity in rural areas, it is necessary to design an optimal convergence model to deploy broadband telecommunications networks. Public administration has to support the deployment of such an infrastructure, offering a strategic framework of cooperation and reinforcing the process of telecommunications liberalisation. Member States should address communications infrastructures and their contents in rural areas as a strategic priority. This will require implementation of European Authorities suggestions regarding the development of information society national and regional plans, through the development of infrastructures (broadband) as well as services. With regards to services to citizens, it must be taken into account that one of the reasons for the depopulation of rural areas is that urban areas provide services to which rural population has no access. The use of ICT could be the key to overcome this situation. The following is already available but needs to be enhanced: direct access to administrations (e- Government), particularly the remote delivery of traditional public services, such as health (e-health), social assistance, education and lifelong learning (e-learning). • TRADITIONAL SECTORS AND NEW BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES – it is necessary to use ICT to gain major benefits through becoming a part of the information society. With regards to the traditional sectors in rural areas (agriculture, livestock, fishing, forestry and food industries) it is worth mentioning the following benefits: Final SRA 33

×