atmosphere

Smart Farming Techniques for Climate Change Adaptation in

Cyprus
George Adamides, Nikos Kalatzis, Andreas Stylianou, Nikolaos Marianos, Fotis Chatzipapadopoulos ,
Marianthi Giannakopoulou, George Papadavid, Vassilis Vassiliou and Damianos Neocleous

Received: 15 April 2020; Accepted: 25 May 2020; Published: 27 May 2020

Atmosphere 2020, 11(6), 557; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11060557

Abstract: Smart farming based on Internet of Things (IoT) technologies enables crop farmers to collect
real-time data related to irrigation patterns and pesticide usage, aiming to increase production volume,
improve product quality, predict diseases, optimise resources and farming processes, and protect the
environment. IoT devices can collect vast amounts of environmental, soil, and crop performance data, thus
building time series data that can be analysed to forecast, give recommendations and deliver critical
information to farmers in real time. In this sense, the added-value from the farmers’ perspective is that
such smart farming techniques have the potential to deliver a more sustainable agricultural production,
based on a more precise and resource-efficient approach in the complex and versatile agricultural
environment. The aim of this study is to investigate possible advantages of applying the Smart Farming as a
Service (SFaaS) paradigm, with the goal of supporting small-scale farmers by taking over the technological
investment burden and offering next generation farming advice through the combined utilization of
heterogeneous information sources. The overall results of the pilot application demonstrate a potential
reduction of up to 22% on total irrigation needs and important optimization opportunities on pesticide
use. The current work offers opportunities for innovation targeting and climate change adaptation options,
through new agricultural technologies, and could help farmers to reduce their ecological footprint.

1. Introduction
In December 2019, the European Commission released a Communication entitled “The European Green
Deal” stating its commitment for defining and implementing policies that will tackle climate and environmental-
related challenges [1]. As it is denoted in this report, the atmosphere is warming, and the climate is changing
with each passing year while one million of the eight million species on the planet are at risk of being lost. The
European Green Deal aims to respond to these challenges through the definition of a new growth strategy that
will aim, among others, to protect, conserve, and enhance the European Unions’ (EU) natural capital, and protect
the health and well-being of citizens from environment-related risks and impacts. A key factor towards the
realization of the European Green Deal is the promotion and investment in the necessary digital transformation
tools that will act as essential enablers of the envisioned changes. According to the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO), water scarcity is one of the greatest challenges of the 21st century [ 2].
Agriculture accounts for an estimated 70% of global water withdrawals. In fact, water withdrawals are growing at
almost twice the rate of the world population increase [3]. Taking into consideration that water resources are
impacted by climate change [4] and an estimated 50% surge in food demand due to population increase by 2050
[5], it is evident that it is crucial for farmers to address water scarcity, as well as water use efficiency [6–8].
Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA), aims to enhance the capacity of the agricultural systems to support food
security [9]. CSA lies on three fundamental pillars: (i) better management of resources, (ii) improvement in
conservation of ecosystem and landscape, and (iii) more adequate services for farmers to ensure the
implementation of the necessary changes (e.g., smart farming technologies). Smart farming [10] and the Internet
of Things (IoT) in agriculture [11], also called Agriculture4.0, utilize advances in information and communication
technology (ICT) to improve farm productivity, increase quality, yield, and profitability, while reducing the
environmental footprint (i.e., efficient irrigation, precise use of pesticides, etc.). It is estimated that the smart
agriculture market will grow by 12.7%, annually [12]. Dorsemaine et al. [13] suggested the following definition
for the IoT, “a group of infrastructures interconnecting connected objects and allowing their management, data
mining and access to the data they generate.” The application of IoT in agriculture aims at empowering farmers,
providing decision tools and automation technologies for increased productivity, quality improvement, and profit
[14]. These technologies enhance the use of spatial data and real-time events (e.g., deployment of smart sensors
in the field, scanning the field with drones) and are, currently, the driving force for the agricultural sector’s
sustainability [10,15].
The domain of IoT technologies has evolved, not only scientifically [16], but has also progressed since the
initial hype some years ago and nowadays low-cost systems, such as accurate embedded sensors that measure
the environmental context, are commercially available [11,17–19]. García et al. [20] provide an overview of state-
of-the-art IoT irrigation systems, and explain how IoT can enable farmers to collect real-time data related to
irrigation and plant protection processes, so they can optimize irrigation and predict diseases to rationalize the
use of pesticides. By utilizing data stemming from IoT devices in the field, cloud computing, and analytics
technologies, farmers are notified as to when to proceed with such targeted activities. However, farmers and
other agri-food stakeholders, are not always aware of these technologies existence, believe that they are too
expensive, do not trust them or lack the (digital) skills to follow them. Ferrández-Pastor et al. [23] and Elijah et al.
[14] have identified several barriers that were delaying, thus far, these technologies’ widespread development.
These were expensive equipment, the difficulty in operation and their maintenance, and no standardization for
sensor networks. Furthermore, Ojha et al. [24] added their portability (for easy application), energy-efficiency
(for extended-lifetime), and robust and fault-tolerant architecture (to ensure sustained operation) as potential
barriers. Finally, Gangwar et al. [25] identified the following challenges in the deployment of ICT: social
acceptance, reliability of acquired data, and technology deployment.
The Cypriot agricultural sector contributes around 2% to Gross Domestic Product and 4% to the labour
force, while the value of raw agricultural products exported accounts for ca. 11% of the total domestic exports
[26]. The most important crop products are potatoes, citrus fruits, vegetables, and grapes, whereas meat (pork,
beef, poultry, and sheep and goats) and milk (cow and sheep/goats) are the most significant livestock products
consumed [27]. The small and fragmented farm holdings, the high input costs (e.g., pesticides, fertilizers,
irrigation), the ageing and low education level of farmers, the absence of skilled workforce, the land degradation
and water scarcity, and various marketing problems are only some of the several structural issues that the
Cypriot agricultural sector has to deal with [28]. It is also projected that Cyprus will be highly affected by climate
change impacts, such as increased temperature and decreased precipitation. These adverse effects might cause
considerable loss in agricultural production and income [28,29].
Cyprus constitutes a rare example of a country where many measures are in place, specifically in agriculture, to
increase the overall water use efficiency. Nevertheless, recent studies by the Ministry of Agriculture, Rural
Development and Environment of the Republic of Cyprus [31] and other research institutes [32–34], which refer
to the climate change in agricultural terms in Cyprus, indicated that climate change is likely to increase irrigation
water demands, reduce yields, and increase soil degradation. Innovative technologies such as smart farming, are
necessary for both adaptation to, and mitigation of, climate change. On this aspect, research in progress (smart
farming techniques, telemetric stations, and soil sensors), in crop fields in Cyprus, aims to provide valuable
insights applicable to the whole Mediterranean region [35].
The objectives of this article are twofold: (i) to present a methodological framework adapted to the southern
Mediterranean region and small-scale farmers, focusing on Smart Farming as a Service (SFaaS), and (ii) present

2
results from the deployment and operation phase of IoT smart sensors in a potato pilot study in Cyprus in the
context of IoT4Potato.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Cyprus is the third largest island in the Mediterranean Sea, with a total area of 9251 km 2. The territory under the
control of the Republic of Cyprus covers an area of ca. 5760 km 2 and comprises five main districts, namely Nicosia,
Limassol, Larnaca, Paphos, and Famagusta. Potato is primarily and intensively cultivated in the Kokkinochoria
area, Famagusta district. The area is situated in the southeastern part of Cyprus and it is favoured by fairly flat
land, terra rossa (red) clay soils, and a favourable microclimate. The average annual temperature is estimated at
20.3 ◦C and the average annual rainfall at around 300 mm. Still, water shortage, the irrational use of
synthetic/chemical fertilizers and pesticides, nitrate concentration, and salinity of agricultural lands in the area,
along with the increased production costs, put cultivation of potatoes at risk.
2.2. Methods of Production and Cropping System
For the needs of the IoT4Potato project, a farm located in Liopetri village (35 ◦ 00 3400 N, 33◦ 530 3400 E),
Kokkinochoria, was chosen as the first case study. The farm is headed and managed by a middle-aged male who
agreed to provide a parcel of 0.5 hectares, which was planted in rows with a winter potato crop (Spunta variety)
on 23–24 September 2019. As described in detail in the following sections, on 24 September, agro-environmental
sensing equipment was installed in the field for the implementation of the designed smart farming approach. A
modern irrigation system consisting of 176 micro-sprinklers (flow 180 L/h) was used for irrigation purposes. Basal
fertilization was applied on 23 September 2019, and top-dressing fertilization on 28 November 2019 through the
irrigation system (fertigation).
2.3. Smart Farming Approach
The technological approach that was deployed and utilized for the realization of the “Data-Driven Potato
Production” pilot was the gaiasense smart farming (SF) solution [36]. The gaiasense system aims to support the
farmers by taking over the technological investment burden and offering next generation farming advice through
the combined utilization of heterogeneous information sources. As illustrated in Figure 1, gaiasense consists of a
set of information sources that include IoT-enabled agro-environmental sensing stations, Earth Observation
services, farmers’ digital calendars, and on-the-field observations of the crop.

Figure 1. Information sources and measured data types towards the realization of smart farming.

3
The gaiasense system utilizes telemetric autonomous stations—called gaiatrons—which collect data from sensors
installed in the field and record atmospheric, soil, and plant parameters (e.g., temperature, relative humidity,
precipitation, atmospheric pressure, wind speed/direction, soil moisture, leaf temperature, humidity, and
wetness). The gaiasense offers the proper ICT tools and information system to record all information that is
related to the daily work of the farmer, such as fertilization application, plant protection, time, and duration of
irrigation. This information provides a full and detailed picture of the situation, which contributes significantly to
the decision-making process.
All the data are collected to a central cloud computing repository where they are stored, processed, combined,
and converted into facts based on advanced data analytic techniques (Figure 2). The outcomes of the processing
are analysed by experts (e.g., agronomists) in order to generate farming advice towards the optimization
procedures of irrigation, pest management, and fertilization. The advice along with selected agro-environmental
measurements are then sent to the farmers through web-based applications. The necessary feedback, related to
the actual farming practice that was applied as a response to the advice, is then returned to the gaiasense system
(e.g., through the farmer’s digital calendar) in order to further be analysed and incorporated, supporting the
generation of future advice.

Figure 2. Information flow for the Smart Farming as a Service approach.

2.3.1. From Data Collection to Farming Advice

The main objective when the gaiasense SF solution is about to be deployed at a new field is to develop and
calibrate models supporting advice on pest management, irrigation, and fertilization. To this end, the first action
is to collect historic information related to the region, the cultivation conditions, and common practices and also
the weather conditions at the fields. Moreover, information concerning regular infestations from pest and
diseases completes the historic information of the pilot fields. The next step is the determination of soil and
climatic zones and the selection of representative fields where the telemetric sensing stations will be installed.
The overall objective is that data monitored from the installed agro-environmental station is to be representative
for the entire soil and climatic zone, aiming to avoid the installation of a large number of sensing equipment.
Pest management advice: Among the most important factors involved in defining potential risk infestations from
insect pest enemies is temperature (t◦), while for diseases, it is the combination of temperature and relative
humidity (RH%). For the needs of the “Data-Driven Potato Production” pilot project, two infestation pressure
models are developed aiming at addressing the risk of potato infestation by Early Blight and Late Blight diseases
under Cyprus conditions.
Irrigation advice: For a rational water management strategy to be effective, it should be based on direct and
accurate determination of the optimal irrigation time and amount of irrigation. Irrigation management with soil
water sensors (EnviroSCAN, Sentek Sensor Technologies), is based on maintaining soil water between an upper
limit (wetter value) and a lower limit (drier value), permitting unrestricted availability of water. The optimal
irrigation dose is determined as the sum of daily water absorption values from the crop after the last irrigation.
4
2.3.2. Collected Field Data
On 24 September 2019, agro-environmental equipment was installed at the pilot field (Figure 3).

Figure 3. The installation of agro-environmental sensing equipment at the pilot field.

From the day of installation, specific parameters were continuously sensed, transferred, and stored to the cloud-
based data repository. From 24 September 2019 until 1 February 2020, 3111 records of hourly recorded agro-
environmental parameters of the following types were collected: date, air temperature, relative humidity, soil
moisture, soil salinity, solar irradiation, atmospheric pressure, average wind speed, wind direction, precipitation,
leaf temperature, leaf relative humidity, and leaf wetness. In addition, information on the performed cultivation
practices by farmers was also collected and integrated. Approximately 45 different calendar entries were
recorded, including the following farming practices and observations: irrigation, fertilization, pesticides
applications, crop phenological stages, ploughing, planting, and harvesting.
2.4. Expert Assessment Process
The IoT4Potato/gaiasense SF solution was assessed by five experts (stakeholders/agronomists) with intimate
knowledge of the area’s agriculture. For this purpose, a questionnaire was used, which included four groups of
questions: (a) usefulness of the solution, (b) ease of use, (c) application, and (d) three open-ended questions
about the most important features of the solution, as well as the reasons for using and recommending it to
farmers.

3. Results and Discussion

According to the collected soil moisture data, two irrigations (applied on 10/10/2019 and 17/10/2019) could have
been avoided, viz. were in essence redundant. This provides evidence that ca. 37.8 mm of irrigation water could
be saved, corresponding to 22% reduction in irrigation water volume. Based on collected data, it is suggested to
elevate soil moisture close to 40% at a depth of 30 cm, mostly after formation of tubers, or to maintain soil water
at the upper soil layer within the two limits 20–40%. The collection and visualization of such information assists
the farmer to use more enhanced irrigation efficiency.
The farmer’s observations are in-line with the outcomes of the pest infestation model. The farmer performed two
applications of pesticides on 24/12/2019 and 31/12/2019. According to the calculated infestation risk, the first
pesticide application could have been applied earlier, increasing the efficiency of pest prevention, and the second
pesticide application could have been avoided altogether.
In regard to the assessment of the gaiasense system by the five experts/ stakeholders:

5
  Four agree that the proposed solution brings additional benefits to the farms.
 Three agree that it reduces the working time on the farm.
 Four participants agree that this solution makes decision-making more accurate.
 All agree that the gaiasense service offers more benefits compared to current practice.
 Four agree and one strongly agrees that this solution contributes to realizing societal goals, such as
making farming more environmentally friendly.
 All five stakeholders agree that the design of the system is easy to understand.
 Two of them agree that it is easy to install the system, while the one was neutral and the other two
declared “not applicable”, as they were not actively involved during installation.
 Four out of five participants agree that the gaiasense solution is reliable.
 Two agree that they feel confident about using this digital solution, while three gave a neutral response.
 Three participants strongly agree, one agrees, and one is neutral about the fact that with using the
gaiasense product, the farmer does not lose the feeling of being in charge of his/her farm operation and
that he/she retains his autonomy.
In an open-ended question, participants were asked to provide the most important features that they find
beneficial to the farm when adopting the gaiasense solution. All five participants agreed on the following:
 Provision of real time on-farm data.
 Accurate information and fast access to information.
They were also asked to provide the most important reasons for choosing to use this solution and recommending
it to the farmers. The following reasons were recorded:
 The user can rely on timely and accurate information.
 The solution is relatively user-friendly and provides critical information that may help reduce costs and
manage more effectively the farm.
 Farmers might potentially increase their profits and at the same time protect the environment via the
rational use of resources (e.g., irrigation, pesticides).

4. Conclusions
Cypriot farmers lag behind in terms of the adoption of smart farming technologies, while few attempts have been
made by researchers to provide and document their benefits to the farmers. In this study, we present a
methodological framework adapted to Mediterranean farming systems, focusing on smart farming as a service, as
well as initial results from the deployment and operation phase of IoT smart sensors in a potato pilot study in
Cyprus. The results indicate a potential reduction of up to 22% on total irrigation needs and important
optimization opportunities on pesticide use efficiency. Furthermore, as it is evident from the assessment process,
the experts agreed on the usefulness, ease of use, and the reliability of the gaiasense solution. We acknowledge,
however, that the number of participants in the assessment process was relatively small and that future
assessments should involve a larger number of experts, stakeholders, and end-users.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, G.A., N.K., A.S. and D.N.; Investigation, G.A., N.K., A.S. and D.N.;
Methodology, G.A., N.K., A.S. and D.N.; Project Administration, N.M.; Supervision, G.A., N.K., A.S., F.C. and D.N.;
Writing—original draft, G.A., N.K., A.S., N.M., F.C., M.G., G.P. and D.N.; Writing—review & editing, G.A., N.K., A.S., N.M., F.C.,
M.G., G.P., V.V. and D.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work has been partially supported by the European Commission, Horizon 2020 Framework Program for research
and innovation under grant agreement number 731884.
Acknowledgments: The authors are grateful to the farmers, agronomists, experts, and other stakeholders involved in the pilot
study.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
6
References
1. EU. Communication from The Commission to The European Parliament, The European Council, The Council, The
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of The Regions The European Green
Deal. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/european-green-deal-communication_en.pdf (accessed
on 2 April 2020).
2. FAO. The State of the World’s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture–Managing Systems at Risk; Earthscan,
Ed.; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: London, UK, 2011.
3. WWAP. Water for a Sustainable World; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2015.
4. Piesse, M. Global Water Supply and Demand Trends Point Towards Rising Water
Insecurity. Available online: http://www.futuredirections.org.au/publication/global-water-supply-and-demand-
trendspoint-towards-rising-water-insecurity/ (accessed on 26 March 2020).
5. Alexandratos, N. World food and agriculture: Outlook for the medium and longer term. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1999,
96, 5908–5914. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Hatfield, J.L.; Dold, C. Water-Use Efficiency: Advances and Challenges in a Changing Climate. Front. Plant Sci.
2019, 10. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. -
8. Bashir, R.N.; Bajwa, I.S.; Shahid, M.M.A. Internet of Things (IoT) and Machine Learning based Leaching Requirements
Estimation for Saline Soils. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019. [CrossRef]
9. Zecca, F. The Use of Internet of Things for the Sustainability of the Agricultural Sector: The Case of Climate Smart
Agriculture. Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 2019, 10, 494–501.
10. Walter, A.; Finger, R.; Huber, R.; Buchmann, N. Opinion: Smart farming is key to developing sustainable agriculture. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 6148–6150. [CrossRef]
11. Brewster, C.; Roussaki, I.; Kalatzis, N.; Doolin, K.; Ellis, K. IoT in agriculture: Designing a Europe-wide large-scale pilot.
IEEE Commun. Mag. 2017, 55, 26–33. [CrossRef]
12. Chen, W.; Lin, Y.; Lin, Y.; Chen, R.; Liao, J.; Ng, F.; Chan, Y.; Liu, Y.; Wang, C.; Chiu, C.; et al. AgriTalk: IoT for Precision Soil
Farming of Turmeric Cultivation. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019, 6, 5209–5223. [CrossRef]
13. Dorsemaine, B.; Gaulier, J.-P.; Wary, J.-P.; Kheir, N.; Urien, P. Internet of things: A definition & taxonomy. In Proceedings of
the 2015 9th International Conference on Next Generation Mobile Applications, Services and Technologies, Cambridge,
UK, 9–11 September 2015; pp. 72–77.
14. Elijah, O.; Rahman, T.A.; Orikumhi, I.; Leow, C.Y.; Hindia, M.N. An overview of Internet of Things (IoT) and data analytics
in agriculture: Benefits and challenges. IEEE Internet Things J. 2018, 5, 3758–3773. [CrossRef]
15. -
16. Tzounis, A.; Katsoulas, N.; Bartzanas, T.; Kittas, C. Internet of Things in agriculture, recent advances and future
challenges. Biosyst. Eng. 2017, 164, 31–48. [CrossRef]
17. -
18. -
19. -
20. García, L.; Parra, L.; Jimenez, J.M.; Lloret, J.; Lorenz, P. IoT-Based Smart Irrigation Systems: An Overview on the Recent
Trends on Sensors and IoT Systems for Irrigation in Precision Agriculture. Sensors 2020, 20, 1042. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21. -
22. -
23. Ferrández-Pastor, F.; García-Chamizo, J.; Nieto-Hidalgo, M.; Mora-Pascual, J.; Mora-Martínez, J. Developing ubiquitous
sensor network platform using internet of things: Application in precision agriculture. Sensors 2016, 16, 1141. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
24. Ojha, T.; Misra, S.; Raghuwanshi, N.S. Wireless sensor networks for agriculture: The state-of-the-art in practice and
future challenges. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2015, 118, 66–84. [CrossRef]
25. Gangwar, D.S.; Tyagi, S.; Soni, S.K. A conceptual framework of agroecological resource management system for climate-
smart agriculture. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 16, 4123–4132. [CrossRef]
26. CYStat. Agricultural Statistics 2015; Cyprus Statistical Service: Nicosia, Cyprus, 2017; p. 111.

7
27. Markou, M.; Stylianou, A.; Giannakopoulou, M.; Adamides, G. Identifying Business-to-Business Unfair Trading
Practices in the Food Supply Chain: The case of Cyprus. New Medit 2020, 19, 19–34. [CrossRef]
28. Stylianou, A.; Sdrali, D.; Apostolopoulos, C.D. Capturing the diversity of Mediterranean farming systems prior to their
sustainability assessment: The case of Cyprus. Land Use Policy 2020, 96. [CrossRef]
29. Sofroniou, A.; Bishop, S. Water scarcity in Cyprus: A review and call for integrated policy. Water 2014, 6, 2898–2928.
[CrossRef]
30. -
31. Nikolaou, G.; Neocleous, D.; Christophi, C.; Heracleous, T.; Markou, M. Irrigation Groundwater Quality Characteristics: A
Case Study of Cyprus. Atmosphere 2020, 11, 302. [CrossRef]
32. Constantinidou, K.; Zittis, G.; Hadjinicolaou, P. Variations in the simulation of climate change impact indices due to
different land surface schemes over the Mediterranean, Middle East and northern Africa. Atmosphere 2019, 10, 26.
[CrossRef]
33. Lange, M.A. Impacts of climate change on the eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East and North Africa region and
the water–energy nexus. Atmosphere 2019, 10, 455. [CrossRef]
34. Papadavid, G.; Neocleous, D.; Kountios, G.; Markou, M.; Michailidis, A.; Ragkos, A.; Hadjimitsis, D. Using SEBAL to
Investigate How Variations in Climate Impact on Crop Evapotranspiration. J. Imaging 2017, 3, 30. [CrossRef]
35. Verdouw, C.; Wolfert, J.; Beers, G.; Sundmaeker, H.; Chatzikostas, G. Fostering business and software ecosystems for
large-scale uptake of IoT in food and farming. In Proceedings of the PA17-The International Tri-Conference for Precision
Agriculture in 2017, Hamilton, New Zealand, 16–18 October 2017.
36. Kalatzis, N.; Marianos, N.; Chatzipapadopoulos, F. IoT and data interoperability in agriculture: A case study on the
gaiasense TM smart farming solution. In Proceedings of the 2019 Global IoT Summit (GIoTS), Aarhus, Denmark, 17–21
June 2019; pp. 1–6.

Adapted from: Adamides, G., Kalatzis, N., Stylianou, A., Marianos, N., Chatzipapadopoulos, F., Giannakopoulou, M., Papadavid,
G., Vassiliou, V., & Neocleous, D. (2020). Smart Farming techniques for climate change adaptation in
Cyprus. Atmosphere, 11(6), 557. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11060557