The previous sections reviewed evidence for the business case for agricultural automation technologies. It showed that motorized mechanization has generally brought considerable benefits to agricultural producers and, when tailored to local needs, it can also generate sustainability benefits through increased resource-use efficiency and saving of scarce resources. It also highlighted – notwithstanding the limited evidence – important lessons that promote a better understanding of the business case for digital automation technologies. The overriding message is that the business case is still weak or immature for a number of reasons, ranging from farmers’ reluctance to take risks, as the technologies are still new, to lack of the digital literacy necessary to operate them.
This section takes the analysis one step further and goes beyond the business case, looking at structural factors (i.e. policies, legislation, public investments) that shape incentives for agricultural producers and providers of automation technologies and encourage them to assume the risk of adoption. In Africa, for example, where adoption has been lower than in other regions, the demand for motorized mechanization in agriculture is already high and continues to grow. However, lack of knowledge and of machinery operation and maintenance skills, combined with trade regulations, customs policies and poor infrastructure, hold back adoption.19 The poor infrastructure in many African countries also hampers access to urban markets and raises prices of mechanization services,38 especially for small-scale producers who have small, fragmented plots,9 decreasing the incentive to invest in technologies.19, 39 Improving transport infrastructure and road networks reduces costs for producers in accessing technologies, spare parts, repairs and fuel, and facilitates the emergence of service markets.40 By improving electricity and renewable energy supply, governments can also support the uptake of motorized mechanization technologies such as solar-powered pumps for irrigation and machinery for processing and preservation.19, 41, 42
Likewise, poor infrastructure hinders adoption of digital automation technologies, especially in low-income countries.30, 31 Limited or absent connectivity and other enabling infrastructures, including electricity and data infrastructure, are consistently reported as barriers in most low- and middle-income countries, including in some of the case studies reported above (e.g. Atarraya in Mexico, and GARBAL in Western Africa). Rural populations are generally disadvantaged in terms of internet and smartphone access, and thus have limited access to valuable services. In contrast, when such investments are in place, they lead to increased adoption – as demonstrated by two case studies (TraSeable in Fiji, and Tun Yat in Myanmar), which show how rapid mobile penetration has created a favourable environment for adoption of digital automation solutions.31
Land tenure is important to technology adoption as it can both affect access to finance and shape producers’ attitudes towards taking risks. Agricultural mechanization tends to be first adopted by large farms characterized by better tenure security, easier access to credit, extension and markets, and the ability to take risks.43 There is evidence from across the globe that large farms often mechanize earlier than small farms.4, 44, 45, 46 Nevertheless, small farm size does not have to be a barrier to adoption if there is the possibility for the evolution of technological and institutional solutions designed for mechanization on small farms. For example, migratory mechanization services – that is, hire services that travel long distances, sometimes across different ecological zones and national borders, to meet demand in different places – are popular in many Asian and some African countries, although, again, undermined by poor infrastructure and by border issues in many African countries.4, 19, 47, 48
In the available literature and the 27 case studies commissioned for this report,30, 31 legislation is often reported as a limiting factor, generating restrictions and involving heavy bureaucracy. This affects the dissemination and adoption of various solutions, such as UAVs, sensors and weather stations, in low- and middle-income countries. This is also true for some upper-middle- and high-income countries, illustrated by restrictions on flying permits in the European Union and South Africa (mentioned by Aerobotics), autonomous machine speed restrictions in the United States of America,31, 49 and import restrictions for drones and IoT devices (mentioned by Igara Tea in Uganda, and SOWIT in Northern Africa and Western Asia). Legislation also affects uptake of digital automation technologies in specific sectors, such as protected crop production and aquaculture. There is a general perception that protected cultivation and fish farming are not natural, and they are therefore not favoured by sectoral public policies. For example, European Union legislation does not classify as organic chemical-free food production under protected agriculture.31
Other important factors limiting adoption of digital technologies are the lack of policies and legislation on data sharing and related infrastructure (mentioned by GARBAL in Western Africa), and insufficient public policies, legislation and incentives in support of innovations (mentioned by SOWIT in Northern Africa) and public–private partnerships (mentioned by Egistic in Kazakhstan). On the other hand, in one case (Atarraya in Mexico), lack of regulations was described as positive; according to the interviewees, regulations would lead to ineffective bureaucracy.
In other contexts, legislation is mentioned as a driver of adoption. In the Republic of Korea, for example, evidence from the ioCrops case study shows how public investment in high-tech farming systems, in the form of trials, demonstrations and capacity building, facilitates dissemination of agricultural digital automation. In Nepal, public insurance policies favour scaling of digital and automation solutions (see the Seed Innovations case study).
Governments, through investments, policies and legislation, can play a major role in creating and facilitating an enabling environment for innovations, and in ensuring that technologies are available and accessible to all and that they meet socially desirable objectives, such as inclusiveness and environmental sustainability. In many contexts, policies, legislation and public investments are necessary to address constraints beyond the control of private actors. This is discussed in more detail in Chapter 5.
