This report dives deep into a reality of agriculture: the sector is undergoing profound technological change at an accelerating pace. New technologies, unimaginable just a few years ago, are rapidly emerging. In livestock production, for example, technologies based on electronic tagging of animals – including milking robots and poultry feeding systems – are increasingly adopted in some countries. Global navigation satellite system (GNSS) guidance allows automated crop production, involving use of autosteer for tractors, fertilizer spreaders and pesticide sprayers. Even more advanced technologies are now coming onto the market in all sectors. In crop production, autonomous machines such as weeding robots are starting to be commercialized, while uncrewed aerial vehicles (commonly called drones) gather information for both crop management and input application. In aquaculture, automated feeding and monitoring technologies are increasingly adopted. In forestry, machinery for log cutting and transportation is currently a major aim of automation efforts. Many of the most recent technologies facilitate precision agriculture, a management strategy that uses information to optimize input and resource use.
Recent technological developments may astound and amaze, inspiring the desire to learn more. However, it is important to remember that technological change is not a new phenomenon and, crucially, not all agrifood systems actors have access to it. FAO has been studying this subject for decades. What we see today is no more than a consolidation point – for now – of a lengthy process of technological change in agriculture that has been accelerating over the last two centuries.
This process has increased productivity, reduced drudgery in farm work, freed up labour for other activities, and ultimately improved livelihoods and human well-being. Machinery and equipment have improved and sometimes taken over the three key steps involved in any agricultural operation: diagnosis, decision-making and performing. The historical evolution exhibits five technology categories: the introduction of manual tools; the use of animal traction; motorized mechanization since the 1910s; the adoption of digital equipment since the 1980s; and, more recently, the introduction of robotics. What is referred to as automation in this report really begins with motorized mechanization, which has greatly automated the performing component of agricultural operations. The more recent digital technologies and robotics allow for the gradual automation also of diagnosis and decision-making. As this report notes, this evolution is ongoing, but not all agricultural producers in all countries are at the same stage.
It is true that there are widespread concerns about the possible negative socioeconomic impacts of labour-saving technological change, in particular job displacement and consequent unemployment. Such fears date back to at least the early nineteenth century. However, when looking back, fears that automation which increases labour productivity will necessarily leave people without jobs on a vast scale are simply not borne out by historical realities. This is because automation in agriculture is part of the process of structural transformation of societies whereby increased agricultural labour productivity gradually releases agricultural workers, allowing them to enter into profitable activities in other sectors such as industry and services. During this transformation, the share of the population employed in agriculture naturally declines, while jobs are created in other sectors. This is generally accompanied by changes within agrifood systems, whereby upstream and downstream sectors evolve, creating new jobs and new entrepreneurial opportunities. For this reason, it is essential to recognize that agriculture is a key part of broader agrifood systems.
The report highlights the potential benefits of agricultural automation that are manifold and able to contribute to the transformation of agrifood systems, making them more efficient, productive, resilient, sustainable and inclusive. Automation can increase labour productivity and profitability in agriculture. It can improve working conditions for agricultural workers. It can generate new entrepreneurship opportunities in rural areas, which may be particularly attractive for rural youth. It can help reduce food losses and improve product quality and safety. It can also bring about benefits in terms of environmental sustainability and climate change adaptation. Recent solutions involving precision agriculture and the adoption of small-scale equipment – often more suited to local conditions than motorized mechanization using heavy machinery – can improve both environmental sustainability and resilience to climate and other shocks. Thanks to these numerous benefits, agricultural automation can also contribute to achieving several of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
However, the risks and problems associated with agricultural automation are also acknowledged in this report. As with any technological change, automation in agriculture implies disruption to agrifood systems. If automation is rapid and not aligned with local socioeconomic and labour market conditions, there can indeed be displacement of labour – the common outcome that must be avoided. In addition, automation may increase demand for highly skilled labourers, while reducing demand for non-skilled workers. If large prosperous agricultural producers have easier access to automation than smaller, poorer producers, automation risks exacerbating inequalities, and this must be avoided at all costs. If not well managed and suited to local conditions, automation, especially mechanization relying on heavy machinery, can jeopardize agricultural sustainability. These risks are real and are recognized and analysed in this report.
Yet, as the report also suggests, saying no to automation is not the way forward. FAO truly believes that without technological progress and increased productivity, there is no possibility of lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition. Refusing automation may mean condemning agricultural labourers to a future of perennially low productivity and poor returns for their labour. What matters is how the process of automation is carried out in practice, not whether or not it happens. We must ensure that automation takes place in a way that is inclusive and promotes sustainability.
Throughout this report, FAO shares the concept of responsible technological change to make agricultural automation a success. What does this entail?
First, agricultural automation needs to be part of a process of agricultural transformation that runs in parallel with, facilitates, and is facilitated by broader changes in society and agrifood systems. For this, it is essential that adoption of automation responds to real incentives. Thus, labour-saving technologies can further the process of agricultural transformation if they respond to growing labour scarcity and rising rural wages. On the other hand, if incentives for adoption of automation or specific automation technologies are artificially created, for example, through government subsidies – particularly in contexts where labour is abundant – automation take-up can be highly disruptive with negative labour market and socioeconomic impacts. However, it is also important that government policies do not inhibit automation, as this could lead to condemning agricultural producers and workers to a future of perennially low productivity and competitiveness. This report argues that the appropriate role of government is to create an enabling environment to facilitate adoption of suitable automation solutions, rather than directly incentivize specific solutions in contexts where they may not be appropriate, or inhibit adoption of automation in any way.
For coherence with the SDGs, automation needs to be inclusive. It must offer opportunities for all, from small-scale producers to large commercial farms, as well as marginalized groups such as women, youth and persons with disabilities. Barriers to adoption need to be overcome, not least for women. Making suitable technical solutions available for all categories of producers involves making technologies scale-neutral, that is, making them suitable for producers of all scales, or accessible to all through institutional mechanisms such as shared services. Building digital skills through education and training is also essential for facilitating adoption and avoiding digital divides based on unequal knowledge and skills.
To enhance sustainability and be truly inclusive and transformative, automation solutions need to be adapted to the local context, in terms not only of the characteristics of the producers, but also of local biophysical, topographic, climatic and socioeconomic conditions. This report is realistic and offers no one-size-fits-all solutions. The most advanced technological solution is not necessarily the most appropriate everywhere and for everybody. As the evidence presented shows, in some situations, simple technologies such as small machinery and even hand-held equipment can lead to substantial benefits for small-scale producers and enable production on hilly terrain. There are even situations where producers may be able to leapfrog directly to more advanced technological solutions. What is essential is that agricultural producers themselves choose the technologies most suited to their needs, while governments create the enabling environment that allows them to do so.
Finally, this report also argues that agricultural automation must contribute to more sustainable and resilient agriculture. In the past, the use of large-scale heavy machinery has often had a negative impact on environmental sustainability. Addressing this requires tailoring mechanization to smaller and lighter machinery. At the same time, digital agriculture and robotics that facilitate precision agriculture offer solutions that are more resource-efficient and more environmentally sustainable. Applied technical and agronomic research can help find solutions that can lead to further progress towards environmental sustainability.
This report looks in detail at these issues, presenting an objective and in-depth examination of agricultural automation, demystifying the ill-founded myths surrounding it, and suggesting ways forward to adopt agricultural automation in different country and local settings. It identifies key areas for policy interventions and investments to ensure that agricultural automation contributes to inclusive and sustainable development.
FAO firmly and strategically believes in technology, innovation and data, supported by adequate governance, human capital, and institutions, as key cross-cutting and cross-sectional accelerators in all its programmatic interventions to accelerate impact while minimizing trade-offs. No doubt, these accelerators will be catalytic for agricultural transformation in all contexts. It is my hope that this FAO report can contribute in a constructive way to the policy debate in this area of major importance for achieving the SDGs.
Qu Dongyu |
