2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2009.09.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and implementation of an interactive Spatial Decision Support System for decision makers in Benin to evaluate agricultural land resources—Case study: AGROLAND

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Visualisations in viticulture enable a better vineyard monitoring, reducing costs and at the same time, generating a more transparent representation of the existent variability in the vineyard, which is valuable for the optimisation • AgroDSS [31] • AquaGIS [32] • • ATLAS [33] • • Blauth et al [34] • Byishimo et al [35] • CAMDT [36] • CropGIS [37] • • CropSAT [38] • • DIDAS [39] • DyNoFlo [40] • • Galindo et al [41] • GeoVisage [42] • Geovit [43] • GramyaVikas [44] • HydroQual [45] • Li et al [46] • LMTool [47] • • Luvisi et al [48] • mDSS [49] • SmartScape [50] • • VBoxReporting [51] Vite.net [52] • • • visualizeR [8] • ViPER [53] • Ochola et al [54] • Falcao et al [55] • LandCaRe DSS [56] • ValorE [57] • Agroland [58] • Gandhi et al [59] • • CaNaSTA [60] • eFarmer [61] • FARMERS [62] • PlanteInfo [63] • CropScape [64] • SIMAGRI [65] • FDSSFIS [66] • MOTIFS [67] • CarrotAge [68] • AgriSensor [69] • • • CognitiveInputs [70] • • Ruß et al [71] Tan et al…”
Section: Viticulturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Visualisations in viticulture enable a better vineyard monitoring, reducing costs and at the same time, generating a more transparent representation of the existent variability in the vineyard, which is valuable for the optimisation • AgroDSS [31] • AquaGIS [32] • • ATLAS [33] • • Blauth et al [34] • Byishimo et al [35] • CAMDT [36] • CropGIS [37] • • CropSAT [38] • • DIDAS [39] • DyNoFlo [40] • • Galindo et al [41] • GeoVisage [42] • Geovit [43] • GramyaVikas [44] • HydroQual [45] • Li et al [46] • LMTool [47] • • Luvisi et al [48] • mDSS [49] • SmartScape [50] • • VBoxReporting [51] Vite.net [52] • • • visualizeR [8] • ViPER [53] • Ochola et al [54] • Falcao et al [55] • LandCaRe DSS [56] • ValorE [57] • Agroland [58] • Gandhi et al [59] • • CaNaSTA [60] • eFarmer [61] • FARMERS [62] • PlanteInfo [63] • CropScape [64] • SIMAGRI [65] • FDSSFIS [66] • MOTIFS [67] • CarrotAge [68] • AgriSensor [69] • • • CognitiveInputs [70] • • Ruß et al [71] Tan et al…”
Section: Viticulturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…of quality systems or the adoption of technological innovation with several purposes. Recent examples of the use of MCA in this context include several issues: the comparison of the implementation of several quality systems (ISO 9000, EuropeGAP, both or neither) for extra-EU firms that trade in Europe (Krieger, Schiefer & da Silva, 2007); the comparison of different interventions aimed to reduce pathogen risks or increase the protection of food or crop production (see, Themelin et al, 1997;Fazil et al, 2008;Mouron et al, 2010;Ruzante et al, 2010); the comparison of different food and nutrition policy options (see Gonzalez-Zapata et al, 2008 for those policies related to the reduction of obesity) and the sustainability impact assessment of food or crop production practices in a given territory or in an area (Janikowski, Kucharski & Sas-Nowosielska, 2000;De Lange et al, 2009;Siciliano, 2009;Witters et al, 2009;Laudien, Pofagi & Roehrig, 2010;Turner, Morse-Jones & Fisher, 2010).…”
Section: Setting the Problemmentioning
confidence: 99%