Whole Farm Planning: Combining Family, Profit, and Environment
IV. Visual Comparison Guides
for Farm Planning Tools
Each of the planning tools described above has strengths and weaknesses. To help decide
which combination of tools may be best for your use in Whole Farm Planning, please
scan the series of tables at the end of this section that indicate the key differences between tools.
How the Comparisons were Made
Nineteen people familiar with one or more of the nine tools evaluated the relative
strengths and weaknesses of the nine planning tools. These people included farmers,
extension educators, crop consultants, researchers at the University of Minnesota,
and people at the Minnesota Project, Land Stewardship Project, and the Institute for Agriculture
and Trade Policy. These evaluations were averaged, and then our project team members
adjusted some ratings to ensure consistency.
How to Use the Farm Planning Tools Comparison Tables
The four tables below allow a quick visual comparison between Holistic Management,
PLANETOR, FARM*A*SYST, FIELD*A*SYST, NRCS Comprehensive Farm Plan, Dutch Yardstick,
AgriSource, FINPACK, and Manure Application Planner (MAP). They are designed to
provide an overview of the four essential elements in Whole Farm Planning:
- Goal Setting,
- Inventory and Analysis,
- Action Plan, and
- Monitoring Progress.
The ranking scheme uses symbols, with  indicating excellent emphasis,  indicating strong emphasis,  indicating fair emphasis, and  indicating the category was not addressed by the tool.
Table 1 shows the relative strengths of each farm planning tool in Goal Setting, Resource
Inventory and Assessment, Action Plan, and Monitoring. This table also describes
the scope and focus for each tool. It is clear that no single tool has an excellent
emphasis in all four essential elements.
Table 2 shows how helpful each tool is in constructing an Inventory and Assessment
of facilities, livestock, people, and finances, while Table 3 addresses Inventory
and Assessment of various natural resources.
Table 4 shows the degree to which each tool addresses specific production practices
that may make up an action plan, as well as farmstead concerns that may be addressed
in an action plan.
Note that Holistic Management was not rated in Tables 2-4. This is because it does
not specifically address these elements. Rather than suggesting specific practices,
HM leads users to consider and choose practices based on their goals.
Table 1: Comparison of planning tools, with emphasis on
the four essential elements of
Whole Farm Planning.
Table 2: Comparison of planning tools, with emphasis on
inventory and assessment of
specific farm resources.
Table 3: Comparison of planning tools, with emphasis on
inventory and assessment of
specific natural resources.
Table 4: Comparison of planning tools, with emphasis on specific
production
practices or farmstead components in the action plan.
(Refer to Table 1 to see which resource areas each tool addresses.)
Table of Contents |
Introduction |
The Four Steps in Whole Farm Planning |
Farm Planning Tools
Farmer Profiles |
Visual Comparison Guides |
Conclusion: Putting it all Together
Produced by Communication and Educational Technology Services, University of
Minnesota Extension.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this material is available in alternative formats upon request. Please contact your University of Minnesota Extension office or the Distribution Center at (800) 876-8636.
University of Minnesota Extension is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation.
|
