The challenges to foster the development of digital agriculture are in my view a good overview of the situation. But these challenges are generic and also very much valid for other development sectors such as water, education, health, etc.
To use them as potential entry points for government to foster the development of digital agriculture is fine as long as all the entry points are addressed in a comprehensive way and in the context of development in general and not just for digital agriculture.
People will argue that you cannot address all these challenges at the same time. There are two tracks of development : the slow track that build the capacities in the country to lead the development and the fast track that involve external support to fill the gaps between now and the moment capacities are well-enough developed. Having a comprehensive approach will allow to combine both. And it will allow to be more adapted to the agriculture sector.
The council (if any) should would have a huge task in mainstreaming digitalization in agriculture and at the same time side-streaming digitalization for development.
Example: At the moment, digital agriculture is not taking up because of private Agri companies using digital to foster agri production but because of IT companies interested in value-chain actors' data, and this unfortunately not for the purpose of fostering agriculture or the benefit of all small-holder farmers.
So creating a council is fine as long as it is clear what is the WHY, the HOW and the WHAT. With other words: is it to mainstream digital in agriculture or to side stream or both? Is the purpose to address the needs of small-holder farmers in the countries or to fit the interests of big tech/agri companies or both?
When looking at the proposed governance it seems to me that it is a very traditional top-down approach. I may be wrong but I have the impression that there is limited room for bottom-up participation. Saying that an approach will be participative is probably not enough.
In a world where people are getting more and more frustrated by the elites and go down in the street, an international digital council for food and agriculture could be a great body to show the way forward, being innovative also in its governance. I would like to see a bold Council that willing to move away from business as usual...
We talk about agriculture and this is more that 500 million family farms worldwide (FAO 2014). With 7,7 billion people on the planet (2019 - 45% leaving in rural area) we talk about roughly 3 billion small-holder farmers (more that 50% being women). This is a huge part of the world population and giving them a say in the council would be right, considering that we consider they are feeding the planet...
Caroline Figuères
former IICD directeur and consultant in the field of digitalisation for development
Ms. Caroline Figueres
The challenges to foster the development of digital agriculture are in my view a good overview of the situation. But these challenges are generic and also very much valid for other development sectors such as water, education, health, etc.
To use them as potential entry points for government to foster the development of digital agriculture is fine as long as all the entry points are addressed in a comprehensive way and in the context of development in general and not just for digital agriculture.
People will argue that you cannot address all these challenges at the same time. There are two tracks of development : the slow track that build the capacities in the country to lead the development and the fast track that involve external support to fill the gaps between now and the moment capacities are well-enough developed. Having a comprehensive approach will allow to combine both. And it will allow to be more adapted to the agriculture sector.
The council (if any) should would have a huge task in mainstreaming digitalization in agriculture and at the same time side-streaming digitalization for development.
Example: At the moment, digital agriculture is not taking up because of private Agri companies using digital to foster agri production but because of IT companies interested in value-chain actors' data, and this unfortunately not for the purpose of fostering agriculture or the benefit of all small-holder farmers.
So creating a council is fine as long as it is clear what is the WHY, the HOW and the WHAT. With other words: is it to mainstream digital in agriculture or to side stream or both? Is the purpose to address the needs of small-holder farmers in the countries or to fit the interests of big tech/agri companies or both?
When looking at the proposed governance it seems to me that it is a very traditional top-down approach. I may be wrong but I have the impression that there is limited room for bottom-up participation. Saying that an approach will be participative is probably not enough.
In a world where people are getting more and more frustrated by the elites and go down in the street, an international digital council for food and agriculture could be a great body to show the way forward, being innovative also in its governance. I would like to see a bold Council that willing to move away from business as usual...
We talk about agriculture and this is more that 500 million family farms worldwide (FAO 2014). With 7,7 billion people on the planet (2019 - 45% leaving in rural area) we talk about roughly 3 billion small-holder farmers (more that 50% being women). This is a huge part of the world population and giving them a say in the council would be right, considering that we consider they are feeding the planet...
Caroline Figuères
former IICD directeur and consultant in the field of digitalisation for development