Accelerating Digital Transformation in Agriculture

Author: Sander Janssen

Publish Date: 11 October 2021

Digital technologies have strong potential to support the transformation of agriculture, building a resilient, sustainable and inclusive agrifood system [1]. As key enablers, digital innovations can play a catalytic role – especially in the wake of COVID-19 – by improving the capacity of small-scale producers (SSPs) to adapt to external shocks and increasing productivity and profitability. With more than 33 million smallholder farmers and pastoralists [2] already registered on such platforms, sub-Saharan Africa alone has seen a rapid increase in the adoption of digital solutions, recording an annual growth of 44 per cent over the three-year period ending in 2018. Despite a rapid expansion of the digitalisation for agriculture (D4Ag) sector across low-and-middle income countries, the reach and sustainable use of D4Ag solutions remains fairly low, especially among SSPs. Only 13 per cent of smallholders in sub-Saharan Africa are registered for any digital service and far fewer are actively using such services [3]. Inadequate access to the Internet and digital services, coupled with issues of affordability, disability and a growing digital divide, are among factors that have widened the disconnect. One of the main barriers holding back investment in D4Ag solutions and their impact at scale is lack of cost-effective ways of comparing and contrasting solutions, and making informed decisions on which ones will really work.

Promoting alliances and investments

Despite a highly complex and fragmented digital sector, there is significant potential for establishing sustainable partnerships and investments. For this reason, there is a growing need for greater coordination of D4Ag solutions and their overarching ecosystem, but how best to achieve this?

Stewart Collis from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), says that Digital Agri Hub (the Hub) can play an important role in driving D4Ag solutions for small-scale producers: “Evidence suggests bundled digital farmer services positively impact small-scale producers’ livelihoods by improving access to inputs, information on managing crops and livestock, obtaining climate mitigating finance and insurance and accessing markets. Digital Agri Hub will collate the essential data necessary to understand which combinations of services are reaching men and women small-scale producers at scale with impact, and act as a guide for investment and adoption of the most impactful digital agriculture products, solutions and services.”

Josh Woodard from The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) adds: "As the number of digital solutions in the agricultural sector continues to grow, the Digital Agri Hub will allow practitioners to make more informed decisions and bring clarity to a fragmented information landscape. We're excited by the potential for greater impact as a result of a more cohesive digital agriculture space."

Convinced of the scope for digital technologies in the agriculture sector, FCDO, BMGF and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) are co-funding the Hub to monitor and track the development of digital for agriculture solutions, and their impact in helping to achieve a climate-resilient, sustainable and inclusive food system. Responding to the direct needs of the diverse stakeholder groups that play an active role in D4Ag will be an important focus for the Hub. To this end, it has conducted a needs assessment, with the aim of identifying, unpacking and addressing the major needs for each of the different actors on the pathway towards the sustainable growth of the sector.

The emerging issues

Across the nine identified stakeholder groups, made up of donors, (impact) investors, D4Ag solution providers, agri-food value chain actors, agritech companies, innovation repositories, policy makers and direct implementers (farmers’ organizations and non-governmental organisations), a broad range of issues has emerged. Tomaso Ceccarelli, the lead coordinator on this Ecosystem coordination activity from the Digital Agri Hub team, observes that: “Stakeholders have different perspectives and goals. But there is one trait that unites most of them, and this is the need for a structured overview on initiatives and reliable insights on the impact of D4Ag.”

Gigi Gatti from Grameen Foundation USA – one of the Digital Agri Hub partners – says that: “It is essential to work with existing D4Ag networks and Communities of Practice to understand how to best connect them to the Hub.”

Responding to these diverse needs is a key success parameter for the Hub, integrating such crucial and different perspectives in its programme of work. Simona Benvenuti from the Netherlands Advisory Board on Impact Investing (NAB) – a Digital Agri Hub partner – experiences that "to accelerate the mobilization of private-sector capital into D4Ag it is critical to provide impact-based data on existing D4Ag solutions and insights to mitigate investment risk, thus facilitating collaboration amongst the different types of capital providers and knowledge exchange globally across the value chain".

Daniele Tricarico, from GSMA, also a Digital Agri Hub partner, has closely assessed the development of the D4Ag sector and worked with a number of different solution providers in collaboration with mobile operators. From his perspective, "it is exciting to see a growing number of D4AG services coming to market, but this fast-paced sector also experiences a high level of fragmentation and many short-lived initiatives. It is therefore crucial to quickly identify emerging best practices and highlight the operational and business models that can support truly sustainable, scalable solutions".

Inclusion for all stands out as a critical prerequisite for the sustainable development of D4Ag. In support, Eunice Likoko, from Wageningen University and Research (WUR), adds that: “For women and marginalised groups, improved access to D4Ag solutions will be stimulated by understanding and addressing the barriers they face in accessing digital solutions. Intervention strategies need to go beyond minimal participation of excluded groups, to adopt more empowering approaches that address underlying barriers to promote sustainable and realistic adoption of digital solutions for these groups’’.

A hub for inclusive agricultural transformation

To ensure the strong and sustainable growth of the D4Ag sector, a better tracking mechanism will be central to the success of Digital Agri Hub, while supporting the everyday decision-making process of D4Ag actors across the agrifood system. Whether the decision is to partner with another D4Ag solution provider, to invest in a D4Ag solution, to create awareness and stimulate the development of the sector in a particular country, or to invest in digital developments for societal impact, access to insights, data and knowledge is crucial. It is Digital Agri Hub’s firm intention to truly act as a hub, bringing partners together, creating capacity and connecting actors to one another, helping them to share their insights and best practices towards inclusive agricultural transformation.

_________________________________________
[1] World Bank, 2019. Future of Food: Harnessing Digital Technologies to Improve Food System Outcomes (available here).
[2] 13% of all sub-Saharan African smallholders and pastoralists and up to 45% of smallholder households, depending on assumptions used to calculate penetration.
[3] D4Ag solutions refer to the digitally enabled business models and technologies to address farmers and food system actors’ constraints (e.g. around market access, inputs, financing and climate).

Caption

Author: Tomaso Ceccarelli

Publish Date: 06 March 2025

November 27, 2024, I had the privilege of presenting at the Malaga Agri-EXPO 2024 congress, one of Europe’s leading events on agriculture issues. This enriching experience was made possible thanks to Agustín Fonts, the Congress Director. My colleague, Inder Kumar, also presented the innovative work of the Digital Agri Hub. My presentation focused on the challenges and opportunities within the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS), emphasizing their relevance not only in the European Union but also in broader global contexts. The insights later on were also captured via an interview that can be streamed via the Expo AgriTech's YouTube channel.

Understanding AKIS

An AKIS can be understood as the combination of data and knowledge flows among individuals, organisations, and institutions who use, produce knowledge and promote innovation for agriculture and interrelated fields.

This concept, first introduced in academic literature in the late 1980s and later championed by the FAO, emerged to integrate agricultural research, education, and extension services to foster effective information and knowledge transfer.

Within the EU context, AKIS has a formal definition under Regulation (2021/2115) describing it as the “interrelated services of farm advisors, researchers, farmer organisations and other relevant stakeholders integrated with farm advisory services (FAS)”. AKIS is seen as contributing to the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) cross-cutting objectives of modernization, knowledge sharing, innovation, digitalisation and altogether, to the transition to a more sustainable and resilient agriculture in Europe. The shift from AKIS as information and knowledge sharing to a vehicle for innovation has been largely policy-driven. It was informed by a series of foresight exercises by the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR), which found that agricultural knowledge systems in Europe were outdated, and largely unable to foster innovation.

The need for an AKIS

AKIS serves as a cornerstone for enabling farmers (and their advisors) to access timely and relevant information, empowering them to make informed decisions about crop choices, technologies, farming practices, market trends, financing, regulations, subsidies, risk management, and more. This with the ambition of supporting the transformation of the agricultural sector, which faces an array of challenges and especially the climate crisis.

Moreover, AKIS are becoming indispensable as farmers and all actors in the food system need to become more and more “digital” to keep up with daily needs and face structural transformations. This corresponds to a veritable “paradigm shift”, a revolution in the very nature of information and advisory systems for farmers.

Finally, the expectation is that AKIS will provide data and insights for the design and implementation of more effective agricultural policies and interventions.

While resources have been allocated for AKIS and Farm Advisory Services in the EU’s CAP, it is not easy to estimate the levels of investment as they tend to vary by each Member State in their strategic plans. These efforts are seen as stepping stones with more in the future, needed to meet future challenges.

Innovation and digitalisation in AKIS

Significant changes are expected when it comes to the digitalisation of agriculture and rural communities in general, which go hand by hand with innovation: for example, let’s consider the increased (but not always sufficient) connectivity in rural areas, and the proliferation of new technologies such as smart IoT devices, earth observation, autonomous capabilities, enhanced intelligence, land resources and farm data digitization, etc.

Digitalisation will become an essential part of an AKIS, connecting such different types of digital technologies, solutions (digital registries, Farm Management Information Systems, etc.), platforms (public and private, for knowledge sharing, advisory, trading, etc.) and data sources/flows.

For instance, systems like the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) generate data critical for AKIS, including the Area Monitoring System, the Land Parcel Information System, and geotagged photos. Future integration of machine and sensor data, alongside initiatives such as digital farm registers and management systems, could further strengthen these networks. Equally important are the several agri “data spaces” being developed at the EU level, including Copernicus (Sentinel satellites), Soil Mission, etc.

At national level, initiatives on digital farm registers and books (see SIEX in Spain) and in perspective possibly Farm Management Information Systems, aim to make them an essential part of the above data flows.

Interoperability is an essential precondition to make the digitalisation process work. This includes semantic and technical interoperability, as well as regulations and agreements for data protection and data “reciprocity”, so that farmers who provide data, are given monetary compensation or at least some services (primarily advisory) in exchange.

Bridging scales: “Macro” and “Micro” AKIS

Recent research highlights the duality within AKIS. A 2023 paper by Sutherland et al., distinguishes between Macro and Micro-AKIS. The former is developed by Member States at the national level, with a focus on the infrastructure (data, ICT, organisations), while the latter (micro-AKIS) has been defined in the same paper as “Self-assembled farmer knowledge networks and associated processes. Regarding macro-AKIS, the members were urged to assess their effectiveness, together with that of advisory systems.

A landscape analysis of the “macro-AKIS”

Macro-AKIS assessments have been ongoing through projects like i2Connect, producing country-specific reports updated in 2024, letting emerge commonalities and differences. For instance, the 2024 report on Spain illustrates the issues related to the decentralised regional system and the important role of agrifood cooperatives.

Also on this basis, Knierim et al. (2015), conducted a landscape study across the EU, ranking AKIS based on the two main dimensions of strength (of the organisations involved, the level of investment, evidence of impact) and integration or fragmentation of the actors. However, given the evolution of AKIS across Member States, this study needs revisiting.

The recent EU policies on AKIS present significant opportunities for the agricultural sector. However, macro-AKIS create a significant weakness in terms of the mentioned overemphasis on national levels as well as the compliance with EU regulations.

The role of “micro AKIS”

Micro-AKIS are increasingly recognized as a key driver of agricultural transformation, addressing concrete issues at the farmer level, in connection with the national level, with macro-AKIS functioning as (one of the) back-ends. Farmers tend to build their micro-AKIS based on their specific, often informal relationships. They engage with intermediaries and many other subjects that are rarely considered national level AKIS up to now.

However, at the moment there are only anecdotal reports on the experiences of such AKIS in the EU. And yet, we need systematic work similar to that done for the macro level.

Micro-AKIS: one fits all?

The information on which micro-AKIS are based, the services that could be provided, and the communication channels themselves depend on various factors.

We cannot think that one system would fit all needs. Much depends on the type of farmer and farm. Factors which would shape the type of AKIS include the age of the farmer, level of education and digital skills, agro-ecological zone, size of the farm enterprise, value chain and business orientation, role of intermediaries such as cooperatives and off takers, country and maybe even region (with their organization and institutional and legal context) where they operate. Possibly more.

Just looking at the communication aspect, it is well known that many farms, often small or led by older farmers, tend to use very simple channels such as WhatsApp groups or other social media, some simple services on smartphones at most. More complex (or complicated?) solutions often have a history of failures.

Larger, more professional, more connected farm enterprises can afford to build their own AKIS based on many data sources, advanced technologies, access to software solutions, digital services, and knowledge platforms.

Tomaso’s personal “micro AKIS”

For a moment, if I wear my “second hat” of a (very, very part-time) manager of the medium-small family farm in Tuscany, Italy, cultivating olives and fruit trees, I can try to think about how I collect information to make decisions.

When deciding on an innovation, say on mechanizing olive harvesting (but likely this applies to many other decisions, for instance on varietal choices, agricultural technologies to adopt, market outlets, etc.) what information do I rely on and from whom? In other words, how does my personal micro-AKIS work?

The role of technical assistance services seems modest (and this is a reflection of how the system works in Italy, at least in my value chain). And also, the link with research is weak (and here, as a researcher in WUR, my “first hat”, it must be my fault too). The empirical experience of my neighbors and fellow farmers and farmers’ groups (formally constituted) or the suggestions of machine vendors seem to prevail.

More evidence on Micro-AKIS

As I was saying, in the literature there are only anecdotal descriptions of how these systems work in Europe, not real systematic studies. And many resemble the pattern I presented earlier regarding my case or lead to similar conclusions.

In the cited study by Sutherland et al., 2023, a few case studies are presented. They all have a common trait: the fact that very different innovations in different settings (the introduction of avocado in Greece, milking robots in Norway and direct marketing channels in Latvia) initially relied on mostly informal networks of farmer peers’ and acquaintances, with research and advisory services only being able to come into play later (or not at all).

Figure: MicroAKIS and elements of the assemblage by case study, source: Sutherland et. al., 2023.

Good enough?

Are these currently farmers’ “self-assembled” AKIS up to the task? Not really, we believe, because the challenges ahead are complex.

Apart from the better-known ones, related to markets, regulations, generational shift, farm profitability in general, there are unforeseen challenges such as the input procurement related to the Ukraine crisis, and threats posed by the climate crisis. This means a further paradigm shift as dramatically seen recently in the case of “sudden onset” hazards, but also related to structural changes such as drought, increased temperatures and radiation, temperature and rainfall variability and extreme events.

The ability to predict and adapt to the effects of these climate hazards goes beyond the capacity of individual farms or micro AKIS and poses technical and scientific challenges to the national and supranational knowledge systems themselves.

What’s next with AKIS?

At this point, by way of concluding, we can say that AKIS present a real opportunity in view of achieving a sustainable agriculture in Europe, although this seems to be possible under certain conditions:

If AKIS are seen as ecosystems, learning from micro-ones and linking them effectively to macro-ones
Tailoring them to the needs and the capacities of different farm types and geographies
Involving as much as possible farmers and the other relevant actors in their co-design, at the same time establishing clear roles (e.g. private and public)
Developing innovative learning solutions to have farmers hopefully more engaged than in the past: e.g. Living Labs.
Reducing altogether the burden of farmers’ and their advisors in gathering and elaborating knowledge for innovation, giving back time to farmers and advisors, their true role: from bureaucracy to agents of transformation
It is already happening, but we need to extend the reasoning on AKIS beyond the European context, and we are obviously interested in the focus on Low- and Middle-Income Countries.
And finally, we need more investments in research to address paradigm shift challenges such as the digital revolution and climate change.

Acknowledgment: I am very grateful to Prof. Gianluca Brunori of the University of Pisa, for the exchanges on AKIS.