NB: This is my personal analysis of contributions to question one from the forum. This post is the first in series of six, analyzing each of the six forum questions that were discussed.

Partnership, being one of the key criteria for selecting mFarmer Fund beneficiaries, the introductory question (below) for the forum was about partnership.

 

Question 1: In a partnership between a mobile network operator and agricultural partners, what unique value proposition does each partner bring, how can they leverage of each others’ strengths and what roles should each play in delivering a service to farmers?

Quick Summary of Contributions to the Question

With regard to the unique value propositions that each partner brings to the partnership, most of the contributions centered around the fact that Mobile Network Operators (MNOs):

• Are providers of the mobile technology platform for the delivery of agricultural services
• Have crucial role in ensuring access to the telecom network (adequate)
• Have the responsibility for developing products that are affordable for farmers
• Are responsible for addressing coverage issues
• Need to ensure that they provide credible and dependable service
• Have the responsibility of charging users and share the generated income with external Value Added Service providers
• Are to be in charge of marketing and communicating the services to users (branding).

On the other hand, the Agricultural Partners (APs):

• May be considered as content providers
• Be able to clearly identify who the target farmers are and what their real information needs are
• Must have rich experience of quality content for the farmers
• Must have clear distinct experience and expertise in the areas of understanding farmers need
• Shall have the ability to solve farmers’ problems and ultimately help them with inputs and services to implement the solutions
• Must have the skills of connecting with farming communities
• Be able to understand which format is best suited for the collection and delivery of information
• Be able to collect, analyze, refine and disseminate (or make available) relevant agricultural information to the target audience
• Be able to market available information services in the field, including through networks of extension workers
• Shall ensure that the MNO fully understands that there is a real business behind Value Added Service (VAS) targeting farmers, even if the information service may take a longer time to take off
• Be responsible for formatting of the content, reformatting, sometimes translating to be delivered and understood by the end user
• Be responsible for quality assurance of the content – including sources, processes and final advice delivered
• Are most likely in the best position to make sure that the mobile “channel” is used well to augment other info delivery channels.

Part B & C: How can the partners leverage of each others’ strengths and what roles should each play in delivering a service to farmers?

Contributions from the forum emphasized the importance of utilizing the existing infrastructure and assets including the mobile channels such as call center, SMS and Interactive Voice Response (IVR) infrastructure, short-code, and billing and revenue collection facilities. The partners can also utilize their respective brand strength and marketing expertise. For example MNOs have some of the strongest brands and trust with the users which can be powerful agents for marketing and driving awareness and the APs can also through their Agriculture VAS, help the brand and increase the market share of the mobile operator. Also pointed out was the possibility of MNOs to provide Agri VAS access via basic Unstructured Supplementary Service Data (USSD) menu service which could drastically decrease the barriers for the rural users to access the service and increase the usability. Potentially MNOs have the capacity to blend Agri VAS with mobile money solution and compliment advisory with agricultural financial services, such as loans and crop insurance.

Reflections on the Discussion

My take on this first question is that the understanding of the “AP” and “MNO” has not been made clear at the start of the discussion leading to all kinds of interpretations, assumptions and labeling. A first look at the question makes it simple and obvious but a critical analysis reveals how complex it is especially with the key terms – MNOs and APs.

In my first post at the forum, I did call for the definitions of these terms that seem obvious to the e-agriculture community. Fro example with the APs, are we talking of any group or organization involve in agricultural development services such as NGOs with agricultural service provision; community-based organizations involved in agriculture; farmer-based organizations; national agricultural units such as extension services, or research institutes?

A key argument that ran through the discussion and confirmed my argument was the call for a third party organization for the partnership. The issue of third party partners such as software developers, technology developers, new start-ups, research institutes, international organizations, etc. partnering with MNOs and APs to ensure the success of good mobile services for users came up. The case of IKSL was mentioned where other agencies and institutions which generate actual content – like Agricultural Universities and Research Institutes, International agencies like CABI, Indian Meteorological Department (IMD), Agmarknet for market information were involved in the partnership as third parties.

So a successful partnership for the mFarmer Fund may need more than MNO/AP partnership by reaching out to other institutions and organizations that have expertise in the Initiative’s Core Service. Alternatively, the APs and MNOs may be able to subcontract some of these services, but the positions of these different expertise need to be recognized.

The four points below could summarize the components of the partnership, whether two, three or more partners are involved:

1. Demand Articulations – partners that have skills and expertise of understanding the users (needs and potentials), understanding the content dynamics for users, etc. (e.g. NGO, CBO)
2. Network Formations – partners who are able to help connect other partners together and also connect users to product developers, ensure boundary spanning and information filtering (e.g. social media firms)
3. Process Management – partners that have the capacity to ensure infrastructure development, management and maintenance, generation of revenue for sustainability, quality assurance, formatting, etc. (e.g. MNOs, Software companies, IT firms, Universities, etc.)
4. Supply Activation – partners that have the skills to train and educate users on the products and services, who understand the language of the developers, able to communicate VAS, (e.g. extension services, NGOs, research institutes, etc.)

These are quotes from some of the experts at the forum:

“The Agricultural partner might not have an immediate capacity to do this in-house, as Agricultural Partner is usually an NGO or Ag. institution and not a VAS provider it its traditional sense.”

“For this, independent agronomists/ SMEs might be recruited if for example the agricultural partner has extensive experience on the ground but not so much access to the latest deep research around each individual crop/ animal.”

In otherwise, it has been acknowledged that partnership is necessary between AP (s) and MNO (s) but other views are that, the role of the MNOs, should be seen as roles being played by Internet Service Provider (ISP). That is providing the platform or network that could enable start-ups and VAS providers to utilize their services and innovations. VAS provision should remain independent of the MNOs.

Other Important Points and Questions Raised on this First Question!

• The mobile channel is great for delivering certain types of information, but not all.
• The profitability and success of the partnership is key
• How would a model work that included two or more MNOs as the service delivery partners?
• Sources of funding for the partnership – governments or on business models for profitability?
• Would an MNO go into massive infrastructure investment just because of a partnership with AP for delivering agricultural services?
• Where are the farmers in the partnership?

NB: The next in series is “Reflections on Mobile Ag. Services: Barriers to Scale“ and available on 12/26/2011.

A wide range of ICT tools were developed and deployed along the agriculture value chain this year. Having reviewed a number of them, here is a list of what I consider the five most fascinating ag apps of 2011.

Note: This is entirely subjective and excludes those that predates 2011 but were either rebranded, boosted by research or additional usage this year. The order is intended.

1. iCow
I gave this app props long before Forbes Magazine dubbed it “The best African Mobile App”. This Green Dreams Ltd creation topped the Apps4Africa Contest, but unlike many other prize-winning apps, the iCow became a worldwide sensation. The voice-based mobile information app for diary farmers is leaps and bounds above most others because of its earthy nature and its catchy name—branding is certainly one of its strongest cards. It will be delightful to know the uptake since it was first piloted.

2. RITS Apps
This suite of traceability and efficiency tools, developed by Exprima Media and Sustainable Harvest, is fascinating on many levels. It uses the most rugged platform, the iPad, to get the big benefits of computing (automation, info sharing) in the hands of farmers. The simplicity of the user interface also enhance usability by those with limited computer literacy, thereby reducing the need for heavy investment of scare resources (money and time) in training. 2012 should be a great year for this suite of apps, as it moves out of the piloting phase and we are able to take stock of the findings. At the very least, it is the most anthropologically astute ag app on the market today.

3. mFisheries
This innovative suite of mobile apps was developed by Dr. Kim Mallalieu and a team at the University of the West Indies in Trinidad. It is fascinating for two primary reasons: 1) It tackles challenges in the fisheries sector, which is often neglected by developers, by providing access to fish and fish processing best practices, connecting suppliers and consumers. 2) Despite the challenges in building a vibrant developer community and culture in the tiny region, this app confronts the particular needs of the Caribbean fishing industry in a truly innovative way—utilizing location-positioning functions in mobiles for search and rescue purposes. That will certainly come in handy in the hurricane season when many fisher folks experience difficulties at sea.

4. Africa Commodities and Futures Exchange (ACFEX)
Though still in the implementation phase, ACFEX makes the list of the five most fascinating ICT tools for agriculture in 2011 because it is the first truly pan-Africa commodities FX—though I have seen several others, none is quite like this. It tackles the multicurrency and cross-border constraints using some of the most advanced technologies available, while keeping the small farmer at its core. Eight countries have signed on so far, 2012 should test the mettle of this private sector initiative as more states come on board.

5. CellBazaar

This glitzy app, developed by an international nonprofit think-tank called Think, tackles a familiar problem—marketing. So it isn’t innovative in that sense. However, it is fascinating because of the branding and the rapid uptake. Few apps, though they are rapidly churned out, in the ag space have been properly branded and marketed—even the essentials of life must be touted for people to rapidly adhere to, use and preserve them! Even the name of CellBazaar tells you precisely what it is. The tagline tops it off with “the market in your mobile phone.” Evidence of the effectiveness of touting it as a virtual marketplace for GrameenPhone’s 20 million mobile subscribers is evident from the one million up-take noted soon after its launch—and a quarter of those subscribers still regularly use it. 2012 should bring more success for this app as it expands beyond Bangladesh and into parts of Sub-Saharan Africa.

BY: Raj Shah, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Administrator 

This Post originally appeared on ABCNews.

Ensuring the safety of a mother and her newborn is not only one of the greatest development challenges we face, it is also one of the most heartbreaking.

Earlier this year, I visited South Sudan, where I met school children studying in a classroom—some of them for the very first time. Although I was optimistic about their future, I was also concerned, because I knew that for every girl I met, she was statistically more likely to die in childbirth than complete a secondary education.

This reality is simply unacceptable.

There is an incredible need to ensure the safety of mothers and infants in the critical period of 48 hours surrounding birth.  To help spur progress in maternal and child health, we launched our first Grand Challenge for Development  – Saving Lives at Birth – in partnership with the Government of Norway, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Grand Challenges Canada and The World Bank.

Saving Lives at Birth calls for groundbreaking prevention and treatment approaches for pregnant women and newborns in rural settings during this perilous time around childbirth.  We received more than 600 proposals to our Grand Challenge, more than a quarter of which arrived from the developing world.  Last week we announced our three transition-to-scale grant nominees.  These nominees have proven that their ideas can deliver real results in local communities and are ready to test them on a much larger scale.  While we expect our first round of grants to yield exciting innovations with the potential for significant change, we will encourage our community of innovators to push boundaries and find new ways to shape collective action.

Similarly, the Million Moms Challenge is inspiring American families to help mothers and children around the world. I am proud to accept this Challenge and will continue my commitment to this important cause.

I hope you will too.

Last week, the Institute of Medicine convened a 2-day workshop in Washington, DC to explore how new technologies, like the internet and mobile devices, can help to close knowledge management gaps to accelerate violence prevention in low and middle income countries.

The workshop was facilitated by an ad hoc committee to examine:

1. The use of traditional and new media to communicate evidence-based information for violence prevention.
2. New applications of social media and other ICTs to prevent violence.

Experts from the public and private sectors as well as academic organizations were invited for presentations and panel discussions. The keynote speech was delivered by Erik Hersman of Kenya. Hersman co-founded Ushahidi, the ground-breaking nonprofit company that initially formed to map reports of violence in post-election Kenya in 2008, as well as Nairobi’s iHub, which has served as a space for cultivating some of the most innovative ICT inventions in the world. During the speech, Hersman discussed how live reporting of violence, through the use of ICTs, can help researchers see geographic trends of violence. Representatives from USAID, Deloitte, and Harvard also joined in the workshop.

Attendees, either at the workshop or watching from the live webcast, kept a vibrant Twitter discussion going during the event. They tweeted about interesting projects and apps that address violence in different forms, such as takethislollipop.com, a site that gives you a “stalker” point of view of your facebook profile. Tweeters discussed how crowdsourcing has become a great way to create new online approaches to prevent violence. Hersman lists examples of technology making an impact on violence prevention, several of them employing crowdsourcing techniques, in an excerpt from his keynote speech.

Some ideas that came out of the workshop were that to bring technology and domestic violence prevention together, it is important to plan, ask good questions, act, monitor, and mobilize.

The workshop was well-timed, taking place during the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence Campaign (which ran from November 25 to December 10) and right before Human Rights Day. It also comes at the end of a year when social media played a critical role in driving social movements that demanded an end to violent repression.

As the United Nations COP17 Climate Change Conference wraps up today after two weeks of intense meetings and negotiations among world leaders, ICTs have frequently surfaced as significant in helping solve the global climate change problem.

While the task of positioning the role of ICTs within climate change negotiations is challenging, groups like the newly formed Coalition on ICTs and Climate Change have been actively working to raise awareness, mobilize political will, and encourage governments to include ICTs within their climate change policies. The result has been for COP17 to give more visibility to the role of ICTs in climate change action.

During the conference, there were side meetings focused on ICTs, an “ICT Day,” and a Digital Media Lounge that provided a platform for experts and practitioners to have a tele-presence.  In addition, tech companies Techamerica and Digital Europe launched an online crowdsourcing app called “Poliwiki.” The tool is the first digital channel of its kind in the world, and serves as an “online platform to help policy-makers and innovators combat climate change in a smart and transparent way.”

ICT buffs have been blogging and tweeting throughout the conference on ICTs and climate change. Sunil Bharti Mittal of the Times of India wrote an article about the enormous opportunity that ICTs hold to “usher in transformational changes in the carbon intensity of growth.” He believes that investment in the ICT sector can deliver “exponential returns in terms of emissions reduction.” His article provides instances of this, such as smart grids whereby electric companies utilize ICTs to reduce losses, prevent outages and provide customers with information on how to manage their own carbon footprints, potentially leading to a 5-9% reduction in greenhouse gases in the United States.

The 2011 Apps4Africa competition, which searches for the most innovative solutions to global challenges, made its theme “Climate Challenge” in order to center around the strategic themes that coincide with policy decisions made during COP17. The winners of the West Africa Climate Challenge were announced on Wednesday, December 7 during the conference, with the first prize of $15,000 going to a web-based app called HospitalManager that helps hospitals and health organizations prepare for natural disasters.

While no follow-up to the Kyoto Protocol was secured, and many felt that the conference ended in “political fudge,” tech enthusiasts seem to have made progress in demonstrating the critical role ICTs have to play in solving the climate change crisis.