Digitization is an enabler. It will open a whole new realm of technology-based value propositions. A group of experts in the field of data and new technologies shared their view. During a live Zoom meeting they agreed digitization can have many benefits, but will raise a number of moral-political questions as well.
Digitization will create new value in global food networks. COVID-19 will accelerate this trend by inspiring demand for more transparency and detailing. Just as Google, Alibaba, TikTok, Facebook, and Amazon turned data into the new commercial gold in the consumer’s world, so will digitalization in food in the hands of early adaptors. They can and probably will rapidly develop into major and industry dominating privately owned powers. At the same time, it can serve public goals, like reducing the loss of natural resources (water, land, and biodiversity) and pollution (pesticides, nitrogen, phosphate, and carbon dioxide).
“Don’t overemphasize technology”, Prof. Dr. oec. Gerhard Schiefer, University of Bonn, warns. “Technology is a facilitator.” It's about how to efficiently organize the food system – and how to use digitization in doing so. “We should have an eye for soft issues, like coordination and pricing”, Schiefer stresses.
An interesting discussion followed, centering around the question whether the discussion is political, technical, geographical, or business oriented. The answer probably is that the question binding them all is ‘How to coordinate these?’
Six main Questions
The new enabling technologies confront the business community with six main questions from a governance perspective.
With or without answers, businesses will decide on how to cooperate and create mutual and societal value on both a strategic and practical level. Former HBS (Harvard Business School) agribusiness director Mary Shelman and Damien McLoughlin created a framework to position real business cases from this perspective.
From various perspectives, the participants in the discussion gave their view on the issues underlying the discussions
How to make businesses share data?
Aidan Connolly, president of AgriTech Capital, a data and technology-based investment company said people and businesses are reluctant to share their information. Corporations must create an advantage for farmers to share their data. “Our smart phones are an example. Think of tracking information from your phone. We get excellent navigation in return.”
“Governance of data will make the difference. Who should host this?” Kristian Moeller, Chief Executive Officer at GLOBAL G.A.P., says. There are various candidates: “GS1, GLOBAL GAP, the Consumer Foods Forum, ITC (International Trade Centre), or the SAI platform.”
Schiefer points to the fact that everyone is talking about the food chain as if it were one straight and continuous line from the field to a product bought by customers. “Such a line doesn’t exist; food is a complex network. Therefore, when you try to move forward with digitalization, you need somebody to guide. Systems integration is key. Currently the situation is chaotic. No one is leading. A party should take the lead here. It’s a standards issue.”
“We need a type of community approach”, Möller adds. “It is all about trust.” Möller thinks complete transparency can even cause distrust, whereas an authority that doesn’t disclose details could create trust.
Raj Vardan, IFAMA’s president-elect, adds a critical and practical issue – exclusion. “Look at the uniformity of standards and the traceability of data. This is ok for large firms and farms. But it is not relevant in every case and would exclude farmers in various regions of the world as they cannot comply. Digitalization is not a solution for everyone. Upfront expenses are a struggle for small scale farms. It will make more sense if companies help them out.”
Derek Baker, involved in the digital transformation of many companies, adds: “From my experience, people feel very underequipped to make decisions. Digitalization is more about changing companies all together – about pursuing a different kind of business model.”
Handling power Relations
Tiffany Tsui researches business models and governance in both the Western and Eastern world: “We need to bridge the different cultures and attitudes. Between different disciplines, between users and consumers, and between producers. High tech is different from organic for instance. How to bridge different worlds? And how to engage governments with their different attitudes and backgrounds? IFAMA as a platform can bring them together. It can be the grease.”
Join the Conversation
We would like to learn from your views and experience to pinpoint the essence of the topics in digitization and digitalization in food. Please share your comments on this platform to feed the conversation. How?
Don't hesitate to share your thoughts in an article (a title, an introduction of max. 50 words, and the article of max. 800 words), photograph (at least one, landscape, min. 1024 x 617), and information about the author (full name, email address, and portrait photo) Share other types of content, like video, podcast, or photo report Join the conversation at the IFAMA2020 Rotterdam goes Digital platform and comment on the articles and comments of colleagues
'We should have an eye for soft issues, like coordination and pricing'Technology as a facilitator
“Don’t overemphasize technology”, Prof. Dr. oec. Gerhard Schiefer, University of Bonn, warns. “Technology is a facilitator.” It's about how to efficiently organize the food system – and how to use digitization in doing so. “We should have an eye for soft issues, like coordination and pricing”, Schiefer stresses.
An interesting discussion followed, centering around the question whether the discussion is political, technical, geographical, or business oriented. The answer probably is that the question binding them all is ‘How to coordinate these?’
Six main Questions
The new enabling technologies confront the business community with six main questions from a governance perspective.
- Who owns the data?
- Who sets the data standards?
- Who sets the goals for managing the data?
- How to coordinate managing the goals as a whole?
- How to coordinate a distribution of the newly created value people judge just? (the ‘Piketty’ question)
- How to coordinate action between various regions in the world, as they all interact but reflect different attitudes, speeds of development, and natural contexts?
Perhaps an open informal network can create global morality and make a difference, while respecting profound differencesNone of these questions is just technical or easy to answer form an existing framework. They cannot be solved by ordinary policy making or taking political decisions. They require a moral reflection on the governance of the world people in various places of the world want to live in. To put it from the point of view of a sociologist or political philosopher: the way we answer the six questions is fundamental to the way people will live their lives. That is why they ask for a moral reflection on the worlds people accept in various regions of the globe – in view of the distribution of food, shelter, jobs, dignity, mobility, and wealth. Moreover, neither national nor regional or global politics can address them, as parliaments and international bodies are incapable of truly open long term and ‘hair down’ discussions. Perhaps an open informal network can create global morality and make a difference, while respecting profound differences between people from various backgrounds and contexts.
With or without answers, businesses will decide on how to cooperate and create mutual and societal value on both a strategic and practical level. Former HBS (Harvard Business School) agribusiness director Mary Shelman and Damien McLoughlin created a framework to position real business cases from this perspective.
From various perspectives, the participants in the discussion gave their view on the issues underlying the discussions
How to make businesses share data?
Aidan Connolly, president of AgriTech Capital, a data and technology-based investment company said people and businesses are reluctant to share their information. Corporations must create an advantage for farmers to share their data. “Our smart phones are an example. Think of tracking information from your phone. We get excellent navigation in return.”
When you try to move forward with digitalization, you need somebody to guideHosting data
“Governance of data will make the difference. Who should host this?” Kristian Moeller, Chief Executive Officer at GLOBAL G.A.P., says. There are various candidates: “GS1, GLOBAL GAP, the Consumer Foods Forum, ITC (International Trade Centre), or the SAI platform.”
Schiefer points to the fact that everyone is talking about the food chain as if it were one straight and continuous line from the field to a product bought by customers. “Such a line doesn’t exist; food is a complex network. Therefore, when you try to move forward with digitalization, you need somebody to guide. Systems integration is key. Currently the situation is chaotic. No one is leading. A party should take the lead here. It’s a standards issue.”
“We need a type of community approach”, Möller adds. “It is all about trust.” Möller thinks complete transparency can even cause distrust, whereas an authority that doesn’t disclose details could create trust.
Digitalization is not a solution for everyoneHow not to exclude?
Raj Vardan, IFAMA’s president-elect, adds a critical and practical issue – exclusion. “Look at the uniformity of standards and the traceability of data. This is ok for large firms and farms. But it is not relevant in every case and would exclude farmers in various regions of the world as they cannot comply. Digitalization is not a solution for everyone. Upfront expenses are a struggle for small scale farms. It will make more sense if companies help them out.”
Derek Baker, involved in the digital transformation of many companies, adds: “From my experience, people feel very underequipped to make decisions. Digitalization is more about changing companies all together – about pursuing a different kind of business model.”
Handling power Relations
Tiffany Tsui researches business models and governance in both the Western and Eastern world: “We need to bridge the different cultures and attitudes. Between different disciplines, between users and consumers, and between producers. High tech is different from organic for instance. How to bridge different worlds? And how to engage governments with their different attitudes and backgrounds? IFAMA as a platform can bring them together. It can be the grease.”
Join the Conversation
We would like to learn from your views and experience to pinpoint the essence of the topics in digitization and digitalization in food. Please share your comments on this platform to feed the conversation. How?
Contributors (alphabetical order):
Adriaan van de Giessen, project manager Food & Smart City, Municipality of Rotterdam Aidan Connolly, president AgriTech Capital, investing in start-ups, and former board member Alltech. He writes for many platforms Akoth Brenda, post-graduate Student, MAgricAdmin in Management and Economics at Stellenbosch University Bianca van der Ha, project manager of Foodlog, the Dutch online discussion platform on all food related topics. She is also Editor-in-Chief of the IFAMA2020 platform Coen Hubers, Founder and Coordinator Greenport Hub, LDE Centre for Sustainability Derek Baker, Professor of Agribusiness and Value Chains at University New England. He helps companies in their digital transformation Dick Veerman, Founder and CEO of Foodlog, the Dutch online discussion platform on all food related topics. He is also moderator of the IFAMA2020 platform Dominique Vrouwenvelder, editor of Foodlog, the Dutch online discussion platform on all food related topics Prof. Dr. oec. Gerhard Schiefer, Chair of the Research Group 'Food Chain Management' at University of Bonn. He is also engaged in several software companies in the food network Kathryn White, Executive Director of IFAMA Kristian Moeller, Chief Executive Officer at GLOBALG.A.P. Marie-José Tim- van Gorp, Project manager Foodlog, the Dutch online discussion platform on all food related topics Mary Shelman, Founder and CEO of Mary Shelman Group. She is former head of the Harvard Business School's agribusiness program and former president of IFAMA Raj Vardan, President-elect at IFAMA. He is Independent Director of Mcleod Russel India Limited, the largest Tea plantation company globally with Plantations in India, Uganda & Vietnam Thomas van Gaal, Strategy Director at Het Portaal, helps companies to achieve their sustainable goals Tiffany Tsui, Founder and CEO of Springtide Strategy. Works both for Dutch and Chinese governments and businesses
Frank Buurman The IFAMA part of Foodlog has an international audience. Could you please continue the conversation in English? You can use Deepl as a translator if you like.
5G farming?
Thielens e.a. laten zien dat door massale introductie van 5G (6G) die absorptie van EM straling door bijen met een factor 48 kan toenemen (Nature 2020). Hierbij is nog niet meegewogen dat naast de horizontale oscillatie er ook verstorende verticale oscillatie zal optreden door weerkaatsing/ versterking door satellieten (nodig om voldoende dekking te bereiken). Wat de invloed zal zijn op het oriëntatie vermogen van trekvogels, andere insecten en amfibieën? (en what about mensen?). Landbouw zonder bijen, zweefvliegen? Go GMO. And destroy the natural environment. And please the power - costly - of GMO multinationals on unhealthy food supply.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-56948-0?fbclid=IwAR1epkktmHyYsGyfrF9Op6OiWB7wI-4TDHNRnU03SJVzAclEW2T-rbl_srw
En dan hebben we het nog niet over de komende LIFI ipv WIFI (lichtbreking is naast magnetisme het oriëntatie vermogen van bijen). Naast desastreuze pesticiden (ook onlosmakelijk verbonden met GMO). Henk Tennekes
Dick #13 In a Keynesian approach governments are spending large amounts of money to keep the economy going. You are right that until now this is targeted at the old economy and that efficiency could be improved by better targeting towards future challenges. Many think tanks, like the OECD, use this argument of a Green Recovery (although the term Recovery points to repair, not to a fast forward).
I had the pleasure to help to write an Rli Advisory Letter to the Dutch government (link to the English version) in which we argued that there are three policy options: maintain current policies, pause planned measures as COVID-19 has learned that society is changing and some of these changes (e.g. more homework, more digital shopping) make planned measures perhaps not necessary anymore, and adapt policy for a green recovery.
In this last category, measures should be feasible in the short run (no long planning procedures), have immediate effect (which strikes out most research), strengthen the structure of the economy and help in ongoing transitions like climate change, circular economy etc, as well as being socially just.
Concerning agriculture in the Netherlands many of the actions needed in restructuring the livestock industry, don't pass some of these tests. But based on some recent other advises from high level government committees we advocated a full digitalisation (paper-free) agriculture.
At a global scale I would argue that IT is an enabler, not an objective in itself. So it is better (also for intergenerational social justness) to take Climate Change as a common objective and target of this Keynesian money bonanza than IT as such.
With that objective in mind most economist agree on the role of the government in infrastructure and utitlities. So bringing glass fibre networks to the country side (for agriculture, but also schools, medical support etc) is in many cases to be seriously considered. Networks of sensors that provide data on weather, soil conditions etc. that help us understand the effects of climate change in agriculture and support farmers in their response is also interesting.
Next in IT comes the soft things like standards for digital identity management (or is your Facebook account enough for the notary and to get a driver license?). Go to Estonia to learn what they did.
As all stakeholders around the farm have some of the farm's data and we need to bring that data together to create value with data science out of the data, and as the farmer herself does not centralise that data in a datawarehouse, it could make sense to set up system of individual data lockers. Such a locker would hold the farm's data in an integrated way with a data autorisation system in which the farmer gives persmission to its suppliers or clients or government to use (part of) the data. This to create a more level playing field in the data/food chain (farmers now complain that every company that announces a big data strategy or start ups that do an IPO create a lot of value in the stock market, with the data of the farmers, but farmers themselves are last to benefit).
Next comes in my thinking the digitalisation of current paper work (especially also in private systems like accounting, certification of farms etc). Like the EU has forced banks in PSD2 to make the payment data of their clients digitally available so that clients become not dependent on banking software for accounting, we should also force companies in the food chain to provide invoices and other documents in a digital (UBL) format. Robotic accounting can then provide farmers cheaply with data on environmental indicators and (agriculture, environmental, food safety) policies can be based on that. Certification processes for products with a claim to 'climate neutrality' (see the CSR policies of Unilever, Danone) will become more reliable and cheaper.
If this all is going to happen? Some speculate that we will see a change of thinking concerning the role of the government in the economy, just as the stagflation crisis of the 1970s paved the way for Reagan/Thatcher to take up the Chicago school ideas (Milton Friedman etc) for a neo-liberal new public management approach.
For those interested, here is a longread with a scenario study that I published recently, and of which a next version is accepted by the journal EuroChoices - available soon.
Dick #12, no I am not. I am, at least for now, reluctant to invest more in agriculture. The return is too low, especially combined with the risks.
Krijn Poppe in this project, I have been talking - as Kathryn White, Hector RR Laurence and Amelia Oei are well aware - about the need to monitor the spending of billions of 'neo-Keynesian' money governments all over the world have allocated to alleviate the crisis the Covid-19 pandemic has caused in the economy and social life.
In July Mariana Mazzucato and Robert Skidelsky (Keynes' biographer) wrote an article on Project Syndicate. They urge society to spend the money from an integral point of view led by governments.
Today in our national Dutch press I am reading an article stating the money printing policies aren't Keynesian and that society is running out of time to spent the money wisely. It could mean younger generations will inherit a huge uncovered mortgage.
As you know, I tend to think Mazzucato is a wise 21rst century economist. As you also know, I tend to think governments aren't really capable of the 'art of the long view' and 'good government' as societies are far too complex and dynamic to govern just from above and Western democracies are both too short sighted and ill informed by all kinds of factless ideologies that have firmly installed their frames all over the place.
Now, my question to you as a fellow liberal in the good old Mill-Rousseau (yes, I deliberately couple the two) definition of liberty (Rousseau: it ends at the point the other's liberties start/Mill: stronger members of society have the obligation to take care of the weaker): do you think data-policy following from answers to the six questions above or your 4 frames below, be could be a focus point for integral policy making in a neo-Keynesian, i.e. Mazzacato) approach and yet leaving private initiative to the market?
I know, it's a huge question!