While some businesses indicated they are offering ICM assistance services to their clients, the findings reveal that ICM is defined by dealers in several ways.  This is not surprising given the newness and ambiguity of the term.

Reasons given for not believing ICM is a viable service are consistent with some of the identified barriers to adoption of ICM.  These include the belief that farmers are not willing to pay for the service, that farmers do not see the economic feasibility/advantages of ICM, and therefore, the belief that ICM is not economically feasible for businesses.  A 1994 ISU Extension survey of users and non-users of crop consultants providing components of ICM reveals that ICM is economically feasible for farmers, and that a cadre of operators are willing to pay for the service.  These findings may assist in alleviating some of the uncertainty dealers have about offering ICM as a viable service.  Lack of trained personnel is another barrier the dealers identified, and one which the Northwest Iowa Agribusiness ICM project hopes to alleviate by working with dealers in the area to train those interested in provision of ICM services.

Go to: Page 1, 2, 3, 4

…and justice for all
The Iowa Cooperative Extension Service's programs and policies are consistent with pertinent federal and state laws and regulations on nondiscrimination.

Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture.  Nolan Hartwig, interim director, Cooperative Extension Service, Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa.