Re-inventing model-based decision support with Australian dryland farmers. 4. Yield Prophet® helps farmers monitor and manage crops in a variable climate Academic Article uri icon


  • In Australia, a land subject to high annual variation in grain yields, farmers find it challenging to adjust crop production inputs to yield prospects. Scientists have responded to this problem by developing Decision Support Systems, yet the scientists’ enthusiasm for developing these tools has not been reciprocated by farm managers or their advisers, who mostly continue to avoid their use. Preceding papers in this series described the FARMSCAPE intervention: a new paradigm for decision support that had significant effects on farmers and their advisers. These effects were achieved in large measure because of the intensive effort which scientists invested in engaging with their clients. However, such intensive effort is time consuming and economically unsustainable and there remained a need for a more cost-effective tool. In this paper, we report on the evolution, structure, and performance of Yield Prophet®: an internet service designed to move on from the FARMSCAPE model to a less intensive, yet high quality, service to reduce farmer uncertainty about yield prospects and the potential effects of alternative management practices on crop production and income. Compared with conventional Decision Support Systems, Yield Prophet offers flexibility in problem definition and allows farmers to more realistically specify the problems in their fields. Yield Prophet also uniquely provides a means for virtual monitoring of the progress of a crop throughout the season. This is particularly important for in-season decision support and for frequent reviewing, in real time, of the consequences of past decisions and past events on likely future outcomes. The Yield Prophet approach to decision support is consistent with two important, but often ignored, lessons from decision science: that managers make their decisions by satisficing rather than optimising and that managers’ fluid approach to decision making requires ongoing monitoring of the consequences of past decisions.


  • Hochman, Z
  • van Rees, H
  • Carberry, PS
  • Hunt, JR
  • McCown, RL
  • Gartmann, A
  • Holzworth, D
  • van Rees, S
  • Dalgliesh, NP
  • Long, W
  • Peake, AS
  • Poulton, PL
  • McClelland, T

publication date

  • 2009