Farmers Need to Control Their Data

Editor Geert Hekkert of Future Farming (link here) points out that if farmers can act collectively, their data is very powerful. This is 100% correct. Farmers’ aggregate data will one day be more valuable than the crops or inputs alone. This knowledge should reinforce caution for farmers before committing their data to new technology without a clear understanding of how it will be used. 

Farmers should view their data as extremely valuable, even if it is not bringing in revenue today.

In a world where data is the new gold, farmers must view themselves as masters of their digital fields. They have a choice: do they sow trust and collaboration in a cooperative environment or surrender their precious data to external parties with potentially conflicting interests?

Why does the choice need to be made today with so little information? Companies suggest that farmers are the masters of their data and virtual fields, but this is deceiving if the farmer does not understand how the data will be used, shared, and protected. This requires transparency and easy-to-understand technology.

The conclusion from self-anointed agtech experts is always the same. If you don’t use the data, it is worthless, and you are missing out. Usually, this is followed with a “why you can trust us and no one else.” The Future Farming article suggests that an FBN (see Norm’s review here) or GeoPard could be a trustworthy counterparty since they are privately owned. Geert does acknowledge the risk of an acquisition one day. 

Venture capital and agtech start-ups need to earn the farmers' trust. Maybe even more than traditional Technology companies have proven they can do much worse with the data than trying to buy grain cheaply. FBN has raised over $1 billion with investors Blackrock, Alphabet, Goldman Sachs, and Temasek, to name a few. FBN, Indigo Ag, Gro-Intelligence, and many of the largest capital raisers are failing to deliver.

The world's top venture funds targeted the agriculture sector because they understand the power of aggregating data. For decades they have backed the most advanced technology businesses worldwide, harvesting endless data and employing algorithms and dark patterns to monetize every aspect of the consumer.

The documentary The Social Dilemma shows how your data can be weaponized. Farmers should not trust a private platform more than a Cargill or Monsanto. Moreover, farmers are not in the race to get the most value from their data. Ag-tech companies need to generate the returns they promised. The investors are the ones getting restless. 

Here are 3 headlines from the WSJ, Reuters, and Ctech showing the sky-high valuations in 2021, the downrounds, and the “star” founders now getting fired.

Indoor farming, the largest sector of ag-tech investment, is collapsing. Indigo’s endless promises and inability to deliver have made farmers and small businesses rightfully cautious. The private carbon markets have been a failure to date. Easy Newz has written about South Pole and Verra, once high-flying industry leaders, now embroiled in questionable practices (see Jade’s article on ag fraud).

Agtech companies are not delivering on their promises and huge valuations. The agtech investors and technologists trying to sell products are feeling the pressure, and the farmers should be patient.

The agtech industry is still in its early stages. It must earn the farmers' trust before it is entitled to aggregate them and their data.