Agriculture Markets – Integra LLC

Fasal: A Free SMS Service to Boost Farmers’ Income

Photo Credit: Intuit Fasal

Over 500 000 rural farmers in India can now access free daily market information and weather services on their cell phones with the help of Intuit Fasal platform, an SMS based mobile service.

Fasal begun as an experiment after it was recognized that rural farmers in Karnataka, India lack price information in relevant multiple markets; have issues with price transparency in markets; and also lack knowledge of potential buyers of their farm produce.

After a period of interaction between some company executives and the farmers in their rural setting, it was identified that the above challenges lead to information gaps that have a huge impact on the livelihood of the farmers and their families who often look at existing means of livelihood as one that does not provide sufficient returns.

The opportunity to provide a service where actionable information on price, potential buyer, weather, etc. would be invaluable to farming communities while also helping bridge the gap for large organizations to reach out with relevant offerings and advisory services in India was irresistible and therein was born Fasal.

Fasal has a single objective of helping farmers make more money or save more money! And this is being achieved through a business model that ensures that Fasal is a free for the farmer while companies providing household items to these rural communities, consumer durables, automotive equipments, agriculture implement and inputs, financial service, consumer goods, and other advertisers are rather charged for the service.

How it Works

Step One: A farmer calls toll free number in their respective local languages to register for Fasal. The farmer is then profiled by the staffs of Fasal based on information such as the commodity s/he grows, current crop season, land size under cultivation, etc. The farmer’s profile is then mapped to the markets that s/he visits to sell his or her produce.

Step Two: Based on this highly personalized information of each farmer, regular market and weather information are sent in their preferred local language at a time that it is most actionable. Additional relevant messaging is also sent on the basis of farmers’ profile such as use of irrigation facilities or ownership of farm equipments, etc.

Step Three: Using a complex and patented matching algorithms, Fasal service connects farmers to potential buyers/agents/institutions who would like to connect directly with farmers and make a purchase – creating an engaged and busy marketplace. The service using complex matching algorithms ensures that the multiple service messages reach the farmer every day, providing him/her data so that s/he can make informed decisions.

Impact

Even though the service is still at its infancy, its social and economic impact on the rural communities is being closely monitored, including the use of independent third-party research. According to Fasal, the vast majority of Fasal customers in Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat found the service useful and it is helping them earn an average of 20% more with the service.

For more information, visit Fasal site and also read this interesting article about the innovation.

January 10, 2012/by actualize

Agriculture, Agriculture Markets, Extension Service, Food Security, Mobile, Originally posted on the GBI Portal

Reflections on mAg. Services: Financial Sustainability

Photo Credit: Book Blog

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

The fourth question for the forum was about financial sustainability. With a thorough discussion on partnership models in question 1, the focus of this section was therefore on financial sustainability of such partnerships. Also with the business case laid out nicely in the previous discussion, partners have no choice than to look into the future of such partnerships through sustainable approaches.

Ensuring financial sustainability requires looking at the sources of revenue for the service. In this context, I believe the main source of revenue is from the users – the rural poor agricultural farmers supplemented by other users. So thinking of a long-term sustainability will call for actions beyond the roll-out funding to ensure that services being provided meet the needs of the users to continue paying for them.

Question 4: How can a partnership model between a Mobile Network Operator (MNO) and Agricultural Partner (AP) increase the financial sustainability of the service?

As stated above, the question assumes that without a partnership (i.e. either MNO or AP alone) delivering agricultural service to rural farmers should have some financial sustainability. So a partnership between MNO and AP should increase this financial sustainability due to the unique value proposition that each brings into the partnership.

Background

A nice background to financial sustainability of services to rural people was presented by one of the experts. It brought out the fact that in most developing countries, the bottom of the pyramid offers an excellent opportunity to the Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) for increasing the rural penetration and achieving a large customer base. At the same time, the targeted segment is price-sensitive, making it necessary to develop affordable products or schemes.

With specific example from India, the contributor stated that falling mobile tariff over the last decade has been a major enabler for increased rural penetration providing increased business volume to the MNOs and an enabling environment to the APs for extending the advisory services to the rural base. Another contributor recalled that, in Africa between 50% to 80% of the workforce depends on agriculture and in most cases it also represents its GDP. So considering the transaction that goes on in the agricultural industry, it will worth it for MNOs to take a look at this industry, when investing in mobile agricultural services.

Financial Sustainability through AP-MNO Partnerships

Discussants pointed out that a partnership between MNO and AP can increase the financial sustainability of mobile agricultural services to rural farmers because of the complementary value propositions that each partner brings into the partnership.

While MNOs are in the business of collecting small amounts of revenue from millions of customers and also have the business systems to support this, the APs have the value added service that the users need for generating this revenue.
The MNOs are also skilled at marketing and getting feedback from customers but again, for these services to meet the demands of the users, APs are the right partners to develop the necessary rapport with the farmers.
The MNOs have many business skills, systems and discipline that complement the know-how that APs bring to a partnership.
The MNOs also have a strong profit incentive to keep focused on what is financially sustainable.
MNO-AP partnership could allow the MNO to understand and learn from the AP how farmers conduct their business and over a period of time, they can build products that will help farmers enhance their yield and in turn increase the profitability of the partnership.

From a different perspective, another contributor classified the strategy of ensuring financial sustainability of MNO-AP partnerships into 3 main dimensions. These are:

1) Short term: In the short term, the MNO may have to pass on part of the benefit of acquiring a new customer as an investment for their future annuity that can accrue from customer loyalty. They may also have to share a part of the future revenue based on the increase in average revenue per user (ARPU), and incentivize the service through the talk time sales to the users. This arrangement provides the initial impetus for extending a high quality advisory service to the users.

2. Medium term: In the medium term, there is the possibility of monetizing the services by the MNO. There are existing models, which are subscription based in which a farmer who is getting value for money would be willing to pay for the services.

3. Long term: In the long term, it requires continuous engagement with the customers which may provide an opportunity to extend other value added services related to financial including education, livelihood, health, etc. In each of these, the subscribers can be provided services through mobile phones on subscription basis or usage basis.

Presented from the MNOs’ side, another discussant also looked at how MNOs are able to benefit indirectly as a result of MNO-AP partnership. These are:

Increase in Average Revenue Per User (ARPU) of existing user base. The ARPU of the regular rural user versus ARPU of rural users of Agri VAS on the same network, multiply the difference by the number of Agri VAS subscribers.
Increase in market share. Increase in number of rural customers attributed to Agri VAS is a source of additional ARPU every month. ARPU from new Agri VAS customers could be equal to regular rural ARPU.
Increase in loyalty and decreased churn. Churn rate in a regular sample versus churn rate in a sample of Agri VAS users. This % difference multiplied by number of Agri VAS multiplied by rural ARPU is the saved revenue of MNO due to decreased churn.
Reduction in acquisition cost. The acquisition cost per customer of a MNO multiplied by number of new network subscribers attributed to Agri VAS is the saved acquisition costs for the MNO.

It is also observed that, MNO-AP partnership could increase the credibility of the whole venture thereby enabling them to explore other sources of revenue generation such as through m-governance services (which are being actively promoted by governments) and m-commerce activities.

Multiple MNOs in a given Partnership

The issue of multiple MNOs partnering with APs came up again in relation to the financial sustainability of the partnership. The questioner was interested in the trade-offs from taking a multi-MNO approach versus an exclusive approach in countries where there are two or more MNOs sharing the market more or less equally. In other words, would the strengths of having one exclusive MNO as a partner be so diminished by a multi-MNO approach, that a multi-MNO approach would rarely be seen as a likely path to financial sustainability?

There were mix responses to this concern including the fact that MNOs, especially in countries where market share is relatively balanced, will all try to develop their own proprietary mobile agricultural platforms with similar content and business models, which will result in a race to the bottom. Some others believe that multi-MNO approach is possible but:

a) Agriculture partners need to retain ownership of the data, thereby allowing them to use it on multiple platforms but, add value to each MNO by supporting them with the development of differentiation strategies.

b) Agriculture partners can work exclusively with an MNO but, as part of that effort, work with the telecom company to establish a fair and transparent pricing model to enable out-of-network users to access the information.

Apart from these ideas, there was no specific examples of multi-MNO partnerships from the forum. But another interesting view from India was that, because there is already a substantial struggle to ‘sell’ agricultural content, the issue of exclusivity is debatable. However if the agricultural content is customized and filtered enough (customized as per local needs) placing the same in a shopping cart is relatively easy.

So how can a partnership between MNO and AP increase financial sustainability of such association? Each partner has some unique skills and abilities that they use in their business as shared above to financially sustain their activities. Bringing these unique qualities together is expected to increase the individual potentials of the partners at the same time ensuring higher quality service to the users.

NB: The Next in the series (5th) is “Reflections on mAg Services: Content Sourcing, Quality Assurance & Dissemination” (Available on 01/03/2012)

The first, second and third posts are:

1. “Reflections on mAg. Services: Partnerships Between MNOs and APs”

2. “Reflections on mAg. Services: Barriers to Scale“

3. “Reflections on mAg Services: Is there a Business Case for Serving Farmers?“

December 31, 2011/by actualize

Agriculture, Agriculture Markets, Extension Service, Mobile, Originally posted on the GBI Portal

Reflections on mAg. Services: Barriers to Scale

Photo Credit: Spore

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

One of the objectives of the mFarmer Initiative is to drive scalable, replicable and commercially successful mobile agricultural solutions that bridge the information gap and increase the productivity and income of rural smallholders. With this mind, the second forum question was about barriers to scaling mobile agricultural services as stated below:

Question 2: What are the barriers to reaching scale with mobile agriculture information services and how can partnering with a mobile network operator (MNO) reduce these?

To really answer this second question, discussants needed to first understand what a successful ‘scaled’ mobile agricultural service is; identify the barriers to scale; and then look at the unique value propositions that each partner brings and their roles in the partnership.

Successful Scaled Mobile Agricultural Service?

The challenges associated with scaling ICT projects in general and mobile services in specific came up several times during the discussion. Scale by default may be seen in terms of wide-reaching impact of the service through adoption by a large number of individuals, communities, regions, etc. It is about moving projects from being islands of excellence to serve and empower a larger audience. Others also look at quality benefits of the service to more people over a wider geographical area, more equitably, more quickly, and more lastingly. So what are the barriers to taking mobile agricultural services from small-scale level to a larger scale and at the same time maintaining the quality and ensuring sustainability?

Below is my summary of barriers to scale of mobile agricultural services from the forum:

Infrastructure strength – weak presence in terms of infrastructure of MNOs could be a challenge to scaling
Reliability of message delivery – less reliability in delivery of messages to the customers may prevent future expansion
Cost of delivery mechanism – high cost of the delivery mechanism could also be a challenge to the MNO
Average Revenue Per User (ARPU) – low ARPU of customers shows how unprofitable the MNO will be and a barrier to scale
Language – high diversity of local languages within a given country/region of service deployment could affect smooth scaling
Literacy – low illiteracy rate in a country or region may affect successful scaling of mobile agriculture service
Technology – highly complex mobile handsets, difficult-to-use interface and medium of delivery could be a barrier
Government Policies – since most of these mobile agricultural services are private sector driven, without sound government information and agricultural policies and regulations, it will be difficult to scale
Accessibility – to MNO for smooth and easy enrolment process and Point of Presence for post-sales service
Affordability – expensive services to the user will prevent wide-scale adoption
Local needs of users – lack of understanding of local needs and demands of the users

“If right products in which the targeted beneficiaries find value are created, scaling should happen by itself.”

Part B: How can partnering with a mobile network operator (MNO) reduce barriers to scaling mobile agricultural services?

The first post in response to the main question seemed to address this second part of the question that focus more on “intermediaries.” The post argued that barriers to scale of market information systems are more about the ‘architecture’ of the system than the kind/type of partnerships formed between and among the service providers and MNOs. In other words, partnership with MNOs is not a magic wand for scaling mobile agricultural services.

So does it worth it for agricultural value added service provider to partner with MNO for scaling?

This interesting post critiqued the role of intermediaries in delivering market information to users within the agricultural value chain. The contributor argued that the cost involved in identifying potential intermediaries, training and maintaining them to access agricultural information through SMS or helpline services and then delivering it to the farmers is a huge challenge to scaling and sustainability.

Based on the contributions from the forum, I have identified two types of intermediaries namely ‘human intermediaries’ and ‘technological intermediaries’ in the context of mobile agricultural service delivery.

Human Intermediaries

This includes intermediaries working directly with farmers such as the agricultural extension agents and also the Grameen Foundations Community Knowledge Workers (CKWs). The challenges associated with the human intermediaries have led to the enormous utilization of the technological intermediaries.

Technological Intermediaries

The technological intermediaries are the communication technologies that ensure direct-to-farmer services, and in this case mobile services such as SMS, data, voice, etc. that are all critical channels for delivering targeted, relevant and actionable information to as many farmers as possible. But the need to use the right technology at the right stage of the value chain for effective content delivery was deliberated upon.

a) SMS services: The ability of SMS services like Esoko and Reuters Market Light (RML) to timely deliver market information to farmers has been well documented but the actual impact of these services on the production of the farmers and their living conditions is yet to be documented. Meanwhile, the social and technological challenges associated with SMS in these rural areas have been mentioned as a barrier. While the cost of providing SMS service may be cheap, due to the low literacy rates in these areas and the complexity with some of the user interface, some discussants do not see the future of SMS in providing mobile agricultural services to farmers.

Some other contributions pointed out the challenge with illiteracy and SMS use but cited examples where farmers are overcoming this by engaging other family members to read and translate the SMS messages for them, especially with Mobile Money services. With agricultural information, farmer groups/cooperatives are the target rather than individual farmers so that within each group, at least one literate member can play the intermediary role by reading and translating text messages to other group members.

The idea of using volunteers or exploring national service or youth service schemes in some parts of Africa to provide agricultural information through the technological intermediaries to smoothly transition into more sustainable economic models was also brought up.

b) Voice-based services: When it comes to voice-based services, discussants were concerned with their economic sustainability. They argued that interactive voice response (IVR) that allows computers to interact with humans, and call centers are the most costly information delivery mechanisms. And since farmers’ willingness to pay for agronomic information tends to be low, any business model that depends on IVR or call centers may need some other funding alternatives for sustenance. So the key question to ask is, if there are any indications that farmers’ willingness-to-pay will increase to the point of equilibrium with the cost of these services?

Another view is to go automatically with IVR without any real time human input, which can empower farmers directly to search and find information they need, or feed the system with information they have through voice technology. Some examples of systems currently exploring this system includes Voice Browsing Acceptance and Trust (VBAT), Web Alliance for Re-greening in Africa (W4RA), and Voice-based Community-Centric Mobile Services (VOICES).

And so What?

The need to take some of the existing mobile agricultural services from one level to another has been acknowledged. Even though partnering with a MNO is not a magic wand to scaling of these projects, the potentials for such a partnership as noted in the discussion of question one, and the barriers outlined above may necessitate collaboration for scaling.

The issues of intermediaries that dominated the second part of the discussion is a good example for experts (both from MNOs and agricultural partners) to understand all the complexities with mobile agricultural services. It is more than technology. It is about using the right technology at the right time to deliver content in the right format for users. It is about combining social and technological processes to deliver user-centered content.

The success story of IKSL in India came up again to attest to the fact that, partnership can help in scaling mobile agricultural services. But the success of IKSL is linked to the partnership with IFFCO, a 40 year old co-operative that has a strong base with the users. The idea of working towards removing human intermediaries in mobile agricultural system can me catastrophic. The citing of Direct2Farm project of CABI which aims at enabling farmers to seek and source information, tailor-made to their individual need, at any time in any form/format sounds great. But a search on this Direct2Farm project does not give any further information.

We will have to wait to see how this works – either through the automatic IVR system or the CABI’s Direct2Farm project. But I believe the consensus at the end of the discussion is that the technological intermediaries are not to replace the human intermediaries but to be used in stages of the value chain where the human intermediaries are not needed. I agree with another contributor who stated that “The issue is to remove people where they are not critical, so that services can increase in quality, quantity, and efficiency.”

The next in series (3rd) is Reflections on mAg Services: Is there a Business Case for Serving Farmers? and available on 12/29/2011.

The first post is “Reflections on mAg Services: Partnerships Between MNOs and APs”

December 26, 2011/by actualize

Agriculture, Agriculture Markets, Extension Service, Farmer to Farmer, Food Security, Originally posted on the GBI Portal, Sustainable Agriculture

Reflections on Mobile Agriculture Services: Blog Series

Photo Credit: e-Agriculture

The mFarmer Initiative, a partnership between GSMA, USAID and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) in collaboration with e-Agriculture, initiated an online discussion late November to early December 2011.

The 2-week forum which was organized around six main questions, touched on critical issues from partnerships, barriers to scale, business cases/models, content, and mistakes committed by service providers in delivering these services.

As one of the participants in this forum, I have decided to reflect on the discussion which falls within my professional interest of using information and communication technologies (ICTs) to improve the living conditions of rural people in the developing nations, most of which are farmers by enhancing their access to resources.

There are six reflections in the series that are available through this portal for readers. Below is the list of titles, links, and dates of the posts:

1: Reflections on mAg Services: Partnerships Between MNOs and APs (Available on 12/22/2011)

2: Reflections on mAg. Services: Barriers to Scale (Available on 12/26/2011)

3: Reflections on mAg Services: Is there a Business Case for Serving Farmers? (Available on 12/29/2011)

4: Reflections on mAg Services: Financial Sustainability (Available on 12/31/2011)

5: Reflections on mAg Services: Content Sourcing, Quality Assurance & Dissemination (Available on 01/03/2012)

6: Reflections on mAg Services: Mistakes and Pitfalls of MNOs/NGOs (Available on 01/05/2012)

NB: These posts are summaries of the discussion and my personal reflections on some of the key points, and do not reflect the views of any of the sponsors, experts or contributors to the forum.

I hope we can continue the discussion.

December 22, 2011/by actualize

Agriculture, Agriculture Markets, Farmer to Farmer, Mobile, Originally posted on the GBI Portal

FIVE Most Fascinating Ag Apps of 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.

iPhone screen shot of the iCow app

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

Credit: 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.

December 20, 2011/by actualize

Agriculture, Agriculture Markets, Extension Service, Food Security, Originally posted on the GBI Portal

The Debate over Intermediaries in Ag. Value Chain: E-TIC Project

Photo Credit: CartoonStock.com.

For decades, the role of intermediaries between farmers and other stakeholders (researchers, policy makers, donors, etc.) has been key in the exchange of agricultural information, knowledge, innovation and other resources. The traditional intermediary role has been played over the years by the various national agricultural extension services but due to the challenges with this system, there is an emergent of the private sector intermediaries. However, with the advancement of information and communication technologies (ICTs) and their potential technological intermediary role, the role of “human” intermediaries is being questioned time after time.

While one school of thought thinks “technology”, specifically ICT will eventually eliminate and replace “human” intermediaries or the middlemen within the agricultural value chain, another school of thought believes that the “human factor” in extension cannot be eliminated. As a socio-technical researcher, I find myself between these two schools of thought. Even though, I have a stand in this debate (see bkaddom’s comments here), the recent selection of E-TIC project by the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) as a success story during its 2010-2011 stocktaking gives me the courage to write this reflection.

The E-TIC project is an initiative involving various players coordinated by ICVolunteers, a nonprofit organization and being implemented in Senegal and Mali (Sahel region), with the support of the Fonds Francophone des Inforoutes and a series of other partners.

An important component of the E-TIC project, however, is the role that intermediaries are playing in this multidisciplinary network as “field connectors” by providing links between small farmers and “new technologies.” The project uses local connectors (human intermediaries) such as governmental representatives; community leaders; volunteers deployed in the localities; universities and journalists are used to gather information/data; community radio for the dissemination of information; mobile phone operators; local authorities; and NGOs, all of whom cooperate in sharing information relevant to the project.

The E-TIC project then facilitates the functions of these connectors by providing them with tools (technological intermediaries) and training components so that small farmers, herders and fishermen are better able to sell their products. Among these tools is the E-TIC website, to be translated into multiple languages – French, English, Wolof, Fulani and Bambara, as well as a number of other work and exchange tools (wiki, distribution list, etc.) for communication between project stakeholders. The Internet platform aims to provide information regarding agricultural activities, including production, marketing and promotion techniques, market prices and other useful data, both for the farmers themselves and other stakeholders, including researchers in this domain. Through the creation of this portal and a series of training courses for field connectors (youth, women, community radio journalists), the E-TIC project aims to provide knowledge relevant for efficient and effective farm management.

The architecture of the E-TIC project system shows a differentiation of intermediaries whose roles are being enabled by the new technologies and tools. Instead of seeing the intermediaries as a threat to exchange of resources – information, knowledge, innovation and even physical agricultural inputs, the project recognized as tools for strengthening the delivery of these resources.

I believe that the ‘human factor’ in the exchange of information between the smallholder farmer and other stakeholders in the agricultural sector is something that cannot be replaced. ICTs are technologies that could be used to improve social processes such as extension services. It is up to the stakeholders to identify what catalyzing role the ICTs can play in facilitating the social role of these intermediaries. The type of ICTs and the degree of use at the various stages of the value chain, may depend on a number of factors including the type of content being delivered, the size of the target audience, the educational status of the users, among others.

And I quote “ICTs have an important role to play for the populations in Senegal and Mali, but the specific applications need to be adapted to local needs and means, for example, low literacy and local languages. Given the relatively low literacy rate in most cases and a strong oral tradition with the use of local languages, the most common means of communication remains direct conversation (whether through farmers, herders, etc. meeting each other or speaking with each other by mobile phone) and community radio stations” (WSIS Success Stories 2011).

December 19, 2011/by actualize

Agriculture, Agriculture Markets, Extension Service, Mobile, Originally posted on the GBI Portal

Is e-Krishok a Model for Scaling ICTs for Ag. Projects?

Photo Credit: e-Krishok

Integrating information communication technologies (ICTs) into agriculture is still a challenge, especially at the farm level in most developing countries. While the potentials of ICTs in improving access to agricultural information for these smallholder farmers is huge, the impact of the technologies on the productivity and living conditions of farmers is yet to be realized.

The task, therefore, for Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) and Agricultural Value Added Service (Agri VAS) providers in their efforts to develop commercially viable, sustainable and scalable models that will facilitate information delivery to farmers, is still far from achieving.

This is why the e-Krishok project in Bangladesh is being praised for its innovative approach. Developing from a successful pilot phase in 2008, e-Krishok has just launched its nationwide scaling up initiative to bring information and other services to rural Bangladesh. e-Krishok is a promotional campaign in motivating farmers to use information and advisory services of a Grameen Phone Community Information Center (GPCIC). Supported by Katalyst Bangladesh, a pro-poor market development project funded by a donor consortium of DFID, SDC, CIDA, ACI and Royal Dutch Embassy, the campaign is being implemented by Bangladesh Institute of ICT in Development (BIID).

The campaign promotes information and advisory services targeted at farmers in enabling them to address their agricultural problems and constrains to improve farm productivity. The Information and advisory service at GPCIC works through an Internet enabled process in which an agricultural information repository, ruralinfobd is at the heart of the service delivery mechanism. Also added to the platform is a link to direct consultation with agriculturists through e-mail. Farmers are not required to interact directly with the technical interface.

A farmer is encouraged to go to any Community Information Center (CIC) whenever they have a specific problem issue. The operator (entrepreneur) at the CIC browses through the web portal to locate solution to the problem presented by the farmer. In case the solution is not immediately available at the web site, a query is forwarded to specific email address that is used and maintained jointly by BIID, and an assigned agriculturist replies to the queries on daily basis.

App for Ag. User-Generated Content Sharing?

Photo Credit: Next2.us

Next2 is a “geosocial” network that allows people to automatically connect around location and by common topics of interest or concern. By sending a text message, a Next2 subscriber can signal what they have, want or would like to learn or talk about and Next2 automatically matches and then exchanges text messages between users based on similar location and overlap of sharing “circle” without revealing a user’s mobile phone number.

I believe the Ag. Sector is interested in seeing new ICT solutions (apps) that reduce or remove some of the existing bottlenecks in the process of sharing agricultural content between and among rural farmers, extension service providers, and researchers in the developing world.

So what is unique about the Next2 app? One prospect I noticed about the Next2 solution is its professed capability of connecting people with common interest. In the context of rural agriculture, I foresee the improvement in sharing of local knowledge and innovations among farmers – a kind of horizontal/intra communication among the farmers. Next2 app may contribute to the production and sharing of user-generated agricultural content among farmers. It could also increase the density of communication network between farmers and other stakeholders.

Next2 also professes to take simple feature phones without data connection and through use of SMS puts those phones on the Internet. I wonder if this could be an alternative solution to the use of smartphones in share agricultural data between and among farmers, extension service providers and researchers. By going to a Next2 subscribers web page and clicking on a link you can send the subscriber a message, the message appears on the subscribers mobile phone as a new text message, the subscriber can reply by text message, and the Next2 software routes it back to the sender as SMS or email. Of course, access to the minimum Internet service will be required.

The aims of the Next2 solution are:

Making the lives of people at the base-of-the-pyramid (BoP) significantly better by enabling them to discover, connect, communicate and thereby mobilize local solutions to local problems,
Giving under-served and over-looked populations an Internet presence and messaging identity that creates a bridge between them and Internet users,
Empowering local channel marketing partners to introduce Next2 to the communities they serve to quickly and aggressively drive content creation, content distribution and grow significant value to end-users,
Building SMS, access phone number(s) across the African continent so subscribers can conduct cross border communication and trade to foster regional markets and economic development in agricultural and other industries,
Enabling brands, entrepreneurs, businesses, NGOs, government agencies and researchers to reach Next2 users and/or incorporate Next2′s communication platform, features and/or data in their own applications.

The use of the innovation is being considered in Kenya, Nigeria and Ghana for agricultural partners who can create a Nokia App for farmers. The solutions is similar to how FrontlineSMS works but instead of plugging a SIM card into a personal computer, SIM card is rather plugged into a in-country hosting provider that then connects the SIM card to the cloud solution of Next2 on Amazon server. Through that, Next2 is able to use a long-code to provide Next2 solution to all farmers in a given country.

Will be monitoring and looking forward to more analysis on the use of the app from the field as it is piloted.

More information here.

December 5, 2011/by actualize

Agriculture, Agriculture Markets, Extension Service, Originally posted on the GBI Portal

Be Part of the Discussion on the World Bank’s “ICT in Agriculture” Sourcebook

Photo Credit: infoDev

The first in series of online forums to further develop resources for the recently launched “ICT in Agriculture” Sourcebook by the World Bank takes off on the 5th through the 16th of December at the e-Agriculture site.

These discussion forums, available to all e-Agriculture community members, will be vehicles to inform the World Bank of other projects/programs that e-Agriculture members are carrying out and that could complement the research of the World Bank.

With the profound potential of information and communication technologies in developing country agriculture, the Agriculture and Rural Development Department (ARD) of the World Bank in collaboration with infoDev (part of the World Bank Group) embarked in an effort to explore and capture the expanding knowledge and use of ICT tools in agrarian livelihoods. “ICT in Agriculture: Connecting Smallholders to Knowledge, Networks and Institutions”, an electronic Sourcebook (e-Sourcebook) is the product of this effort which was released in November 2011.

The Sourcebook offers practical examples and case studies from around the world. A compilation of modules related to 14 agricultural subsectors, each module covers the challenges, lessons learned, and enabling factors associated with using ICT to improve smallholder livelihoods. Its aim is to support development practitioners in exploring the use of or designing, implementing, and investing in ICT enabled agriculture interventions.

The first of these forums will look at Strengthening Agricultural Marketing with ICT.

Sourcebook module 9 begins with an overview of the need for and impact of ICTs in agricultural marketing, especially from the perspectives of producers, consumers, and traders. Specifically, the forum will look at mobile phones as a marketing tool; evidence that ICT is changing logistics and transaction costs; the use of ICTs for market research (both for acquiring immediate market information and acquiring market intelligence over time); and the use of ICTs to make input supply and use more effective.

Participating Subject Matter experts include:

Grahame Dixie, World Bank
Shaun Ferris, Catholic Relief Services
Judy Payne, USAID
Eija Pehu, World Bank
Rantej Singh, Reuters Market Light, Thompson Reuters

To participate in the forum, you must be registered on the e-Agriculture community website. All e-Agriculture forums are asynchronous conversations, and run non-stop for their two week duration. It is possible to log on at any time from anywhere to participate.

December 2, 2011/by actualize

Agriculture, Agriculture Markets, Extension Service, Mobile, Originally posted on the GBI Portal

12 Opportunities for Mobile Telecommunications in Agriculture

Photo Credit: Vodafone

In their recent report “Connected Agriculture,” Vodafone and Accenture with support from Oxfam outlined 12 opportunities that mobile telecommunication has for farmers.

The opportunities were identified as ‘the most important’ through stakeholder consultations and are grouped into four categories.

Category I: Improving Access to Financial Services through increasing access and affordability to these services tailored for agricultural purposes. The opportunities under this category include:

1. Mobile Payment Systems which offer people without access to financial services an affordable and secure way to transfer and save money using their mobile phones.

2. Micro-Insurance System that protects farmers against losses when bad weather harms their harvest, encouraging them to buy higher-quality seeds and invest in fertilizer and other inputs.

3. Micro-Lending Platforms that connect smallholders in developing countries with individuals elsewhere willing to provide finance to help the farmers to buy much-needed agricultural inputs.

Category II: Provision of Agricultural Information i.e. delivering information relevant to farmers, such as agricultural techniques, commodity prices and weather forecasts, where traditional methods of communication are limited. The opportunities under this category are:

4. Mobile Information Platforms that link farmers to receive texts with news and information that help to improve the productivity of their land and increase their incomes.

5. Farmer Helplines that connect farmers to agricultural experts who can provide quick and accurate answers to agricultural queries

Category III: Improving Data Visibility for Supply Chain Efficiency. This is done through optimizing supply chain management across the sector, and delivering efficiency improvements for transportation logistics. The opportunities here include:

6. Smart Logistics that use mobile technology to help distribution companies manage their fleets more efficiently – reducing costs for farmers and distributors, cutting fuel use and related carbon emissions and potentially preventing food losses.

7. Traceability and Tracking Systems that are use to track individual food products through the supply chain from grower to retailer.

8. Mobile Management of Supplier Networks that could use mobile phones to manage their networks of small-scale growers and help field agents collect information.

9. Mobile Management of Distribution Networks such as agricultural inputs like seeds, fertilizer and crop protection products could use mobile to gather sales and stock data, improving availability for farmers and increasing sales.

Category IV: Enhancing Access to Markets i.e. by enhancing the link between commodity exchanges, traders, buyers and sellers of agricultural produce. The opportunities for mobile telecommunications are:

10. Agricultural Trading Platforms that use mobile technologies to link smallholder farmers directly with potential buyers thereby helping them to secure the best price for their produce, as well as promoting investment in agriculture and reducing food losses.

11. Agricultural Tendering Platforms that allow mobile technologies for submitting and bidding on tenders for food distribution, processing and exporting could make the agricultural supply chain more competitive and efficient.

12. Agricultural Bartering Platforms could use mobile technologies to help agricultural workers in rural communities exchange goods and services and improve communities’ livelihoods.

Some of the benefits that could be obtained from these opportunities are monitoring resources and tracking products; unlocking productivity potential while helping to manage the impacts of increased production, such as increased water use and greenhouse gas emissions; increasing agricultural income by around US$138 billion across 26 of Vodafone’s markets in 2020; helping to meet the challenge of feeding an estimated 9.2 billion people by 2050; helping to cut carbon dioxide emissions by approximately 5 mega tonnes (Mt) in these markets; and reducing freshwater withdrawals for agricultural irrigation by 6%, with significant savings in water-stressed regions. These benefits assume there will be around 549 million mobile connections to relevant services in 2020.

November 22, 2011/by actualize

Case Studies

Contact Details

Quick Links

About

Expertise

Impact

Join

Sign up for Updates